It's surprising that someone who was "Cameron's head of strategy" dare stick his head above the parapet ever again. How did that strategy on the EU pan out, Andrew?
Not really. Cameron at least won a majority something which May hasn’t done.
He lost a referendum
We know that. The point is he did some winning in his time as leader, in contrast to May.
So Labour won the 2017 election? Must have missed the part when Corbyn became PM.
No, they didn’t. But May didn’t win a majority, she actually lost one.
@HYUFD Why would those who voted for Corbyn switch to voting for JRM? May was a Remainer, but she totally embraced Brexit during the GE. She was willingly to implement a Hard Brexit, just as a true Brexiteer would be. The idea that a more hardline stance on Brexit would have delivered a majority goes against the information we know about the GE: that a significant number of Conservative Remainers switched to Labour, and that voters under 45 moved towards Labour in significant numbers, many of which voted Remain and dislike the social conservatism associated with the Brexit project. Also I don’t see JRM appealing to the economic concerns of these voters re the cost of living and home ownership.
Corbyn did better not just ‘because he spoke with conviction’ but because he is was able to mobilise those disaffected by the current economic status quo, those who were socially liberal and disliked Brexit and those - particularly students - who simply felt that the establishment were not listening to their concerns, into an effective electoral coalition. It remains to be seen just how a right winger can expand the Conservative’s coalition of suppport as Corbyn did with Labour.
The Conservatives need to discover aspiration again.
In particular they need new policies on higher education funding and home ownership.
They need to detoxify the party from the damage that Cameron and Osborne did.
It's surprising that someone who was "Cameron's head of strategy" dare stick his head above the parapet ever again. How did that strategy on the EU pan out, Andrew?
Not really. Cameron at least won a majority something which May hasn’t done.
He lost a referendum
We know that. The point is he did some winning in his time as leader, in contrast to May.
So Labour won the 2017 election? Must have missed the part when Corbyn became PM.
No, they didn’t. But May didn’t win a majority, she actually lost one.
I think you've jumped the gun on that chart, Sunil. She didn't say May lost, she said May lost a majority. That is true. That she 'won' by ending up as PM (in the same way I suppose the runner up in NZ 'won' because she ended up as PM) does not mean she did not lose a majority.
@HYUFD Why would those who voted for Corbyn switch to voting for JRM? May was a Remainer, but she totally embraced Brexit during the GE. She was willingly to implement a Hard Brexit, just as a true Brexiteer would be. The idea that a more hardline stance on Brexit would have delivered a majority goes against the information we know about the GE: that a significant number of Conservative Remainers switched to Labour, and that voters under 45 moved towards Labour in significant numbers, many of which voted Remain and dislike the social conservatism associated with the Brexit project. Also I don’t see JRM appealing to the economic concerns of these voters re the cost of living and home ownership.
Corbyn did better not just ‘because he spoke with conviction’ but because he is was able to mobilise those disaffected by the current economic status quo, those who were socially liberal and disliked Brexit and those - particularly students - who simply felt that the establishment were not listening to their concerns, into an effective electoral coalition. It remains to be seen just how a right winger can expand the Conservative’s coalition of suppport as Corbyn did with Labour.
The Conservatives need to discover aspiration again.
In particular they need new policies on higher education funding and home ownership.
They need to detoxify the party from the damage that Cameron and Osborne did.
I think Osborne did a lot of damage, but it’s not primarily/just him who toxified the Conservatives with younger voters - Brexiteers have contributed a great deal towards that, especially in light of the wider social agenda that many have which we notably saw re Heaton-Harris.
@HYUFD Why would those who voted for Corbyn switch to voting for JRM? May was a Remainer, but she totally embraced Brexit during the GE. She was willingly to implement a Hard Brexit, just as a true Brexiteer would be. The idea that a more hardline stance on Brexit would have delivered a majority goes against the information we know about the GE: that a significant number of Conservative Remainers switched to Labour, and that voters under 45 moved towards Labour in significant numbers, many of which voted Remain and dislike the social conservatism associated with the Brexit project. Also I don’t see JRM appealing to the economic concerns of these voters re the cost of living and home ownership.
Corbyn did better not just ‘because he spoke with conviction’ but because he is was able to mobilise those disaffected by the current economic status quo, those who were socially liberal and disliked Brexit and those - particularly students - who simply felt that the establishment were not listening to their concerns, into an effective electoral coalition. It remains to be seen just how a right winger can expand the Conservative’s coalition of suppport as Corbyn did with Labour.
The Conservatives need to discover aspiration again.
In particular they need new policies on higher education funding and home ownership.
They need to detoxify the party from the damage that Cameron and Osborne did.
I think Osborne did a lot of damage, but it’s not primarily/just him who toxified the Conservatives with younger voters - Brexiteers have contributed a great deal towards that, especially in light of the wider social agenda that many have which we notably saw re Heaton-Harris.
Labour are officially Brexiteers now too, of course, at least for the moment, and yet get no blowback because they are presumably softer. Sneaky, and good politics.
@HYUFD Why would those who voted for Corbyn switch to voting for JRM? May was a Remainer, but she totally embraced Brexit during the GE. She was willingly to implement a Hard Brexit, just as a true Brexiteer would be. The idea that a more hardline stance on Brexit would have delivered a majority goes against the information we know about the GE: that a significant number of Conservative Remainers switched to Labour, and that voters under 45 moved towards Labour in significant numbers, many of which voted Remain and dislike the social conservatism associated with the Brexit project. Also I don’t see JRM appealing to the economic concerns of these voters re the cost of living and home ownership.
Corbyn did better not just ‘because he spoke with conviction’ but because he is was able to mobilise those disaffected by the current economic status quo, those who were socially liberal and disliked Brexit and those - particularly students - who simply felt that the establishment were not listening to their concerns, into an effective electoral coalition. It remains to be seen just how a right winger can expand the Conservative’s coalition of suppport as Corbyn did with Labour.
Why would JRM need to win most voters from Corbyn? The Tories still have most votes and seats. Those who left did so mainly over the dementia tax and that was because the Tories were not clear enough on a tax cutting agenda, he also needs working class Labour Leavers who backed Corbyn precisely because he promised to end free movement and leave the single market, especially if Corbyn dilutes that. The Tories need to fight with passion and conviction, the days for squidgy capitulating are over.
Corbyn won students and leftwingers and mobilised them yes, the Tories need to mobilise the right in response.
So the Tories actually LOST voteshare under Rudd and Hammond while the Tory vote held up under Davis and Boris relative to May.
The last thing Tories need to do is listen to leftwingers like you who just want them to capitulate to as centre left agenda as you can get them to and to reverse Brexit, Labour did not listen to Tories when they elected Corbyn and neither should Tories listen to Labour supporters when electing the successor to May.
@HYUFD Why would those who voted for Corbyn switch to voting for JRM? May was a Remainer, but she totally embraced Brexit during the GE. She was willingly to implement a Hard Brexit, just as a true Brexiteer would be. The idea that a more hardline stance on Brexit would have delivered a majority goes against the information we know about the GE: that a significant number of Conservative Remainers switched to Labour, and that voters under 45 moved towards Labour in significant numbers, many of which voted Remain and dislike the social conservatism associated with the Brexit project. Also I don’t see JRM appealing to the economic concerns of these voters re the cost of living and home ownership.
Corbyn did better not just ‘because he spoke with conviction’ but because he is was able to mobilise those disaffected by the current economic status quo, those who were socially liberal and disliked Brexit and those - particularly students - who simply felt that the establishment were not listening to their concerns, into an effective electoral coalition. It remains to be seen just how a right winger can expand the Conservative’s coalition of suppport as Corbyn did with Labour.
The Conservatives need to discover aspiration again.
In particular they need new policies on higher education funding and home ownership.
They need to detoxify the party from the damage that Cameron and Osborne did.
I think Osborne did a lot of damage, but it’s not primarily/just him who toxified the Conservatives with younger voters - Brexiteers have contributed a great deal towards that, especially in light of the wider social agenda that many have which we notably saw re Heaton-Harris.
Labour are officially Brexiteers now too, of course, at least for the moment.
Depends on how you define Brexiteer. I think we should respect the vote, but I don’t consider myself a Brexiteer. I still see myself as a Remainer.
I always saw Brexiteers as those who subscribed to the ideology of the Leave project as opposed to those who simply respect the vote.
@HYUFD Why would those who voted for Corbyn switch to voting for JRM? May was a Remainer, but she totally embraced Brexit during the GE. She was willingly to implement a Hard Brexit, just as a true Brexiteer would be. The idea that a more hardline stance on Brexit would have delivered a majority goes against the information we know about the GE: that a significant number of Conservative Remainers switched to Labour, and that voters under 45 moved towards Labour in significant numbers, many of which voted Remain and dislike the social conservatism associated with the Brexit project. Also I don’t see JRM appealing to the economic concerns of these voters re the cost of living and home ownership.
Corbyn did better not just ‘because he spoke with conviction’ but because he is was able to mobilise those disaffected by the current economic status quo, those who were socially liberal and disliked Brexit and those - particularly students - who simply felt that the establishment were not listening to their concerns, into an effective electoral coalition. It remains to be seen just how a right winger can expand the Conservative’s coalition of suppport as Corbyn did with Labour.
The Conservatives need to discover aspiration again.
In particular they need new policies on higher education funding and home ownership.
They need to detoxify the party from the damage that Cameron and Osborne did.
Just as a rising tide floats all boats, an ebbing tide grounds all boats.
For the decade after Brexit we are on the ebb tide. Selling aspiration when it is put of reach will only anger the have nots.
It's surprising that someone who was "Cameron's head of strategy" dare stick his head above the parapet ever again. How did that strategy on the EU pan out, Andrew?
Not really. Cameron at least won a majority something which May hasn’t done.
He lost a referendum
We know that. The point is he did some winning in his time as leader, in contrast to May.
So Labour won the 2017 election? Must have missed the part when Corbyn became PM.
No, they didn’t. But May didn’t win a majority, she actually lost one.
I think you've jumped the gun on that chart, Sunil. She didn't say May lost, she said May lost a majority. That is true. That she 'won' by ending up as PM (in the same way I suppose the runner up in NZ 'won' because she ended up as PM) does not mean she did not lose a majority.
May at least won most votes and seats unlike Jacinda Ardern in New Zealand, indeed Corbyn could end up second on seats and be PM like Ardern if he gets SNP and LD support.
@HYUFD Why would those who voted for Corbyn switch to voting for JRM? May was a Remainer, but she totally embraced Brexit during the GE. She was willingly to implement a Hard Brexit, just as a true Brexiteer would be. The idea that a more hardline stance on Brexit would have delivered a majority goes against the information we know about the GE: that a significant number of Conservative Remainers switched to Labour, and that voters under 45 moved towards Labour in significant numbers, many of which voted Remain and dislike the social conservatism associated with the Brexit project. Also I don’t see JRM appealing to the economic concerns of these voters re the cost of living and home ownership.
Corbyn did better not just ‘because he spoke with conviction’ but because he is was able to mobilise those disaffected by the current economic status quo, those who were socially liberal and disliked Brexit and those - particularly students - who simply felt that the establishment were not listening to their concerns, into an effective electoral coalition. It remains to be seen just how a right winger can expand the Conservative’s coalition of suppport as Corbyn did with Labour.
The Conservatives need to discover aspiration again.
In particular they need new policies on higher education funding and home ownership.
They need to detoxify the party from the damage that Cameron and Osborne did.
I think Osborne did a lot of damage, but it’s not primarily/just him who toxified the Conservatives with younger voters - Brexiteers have contributed a great deal towards that, especially in light of the wider social agenda that many have which we notably saw re Heaton-Harris.
I really doubt that those people concerned with 'the wider social agenda' would ever vote Conservative.
What we have now is Labour offering money and hope to the young while the Conservatives have financially shat on them for seven years.
24th Edition Erskine May Pages 430-431 (I promise I won't overdo this, but unless things have advanced significantly since 2011, this was the official position)
In principle, a Member is not permitted to read a speech, but may make reference to notes. Similarly, a member may read extracts from documents but such extract and quotations should be reasonably short. The purpose of this rule is to maintain the cut and thrust of debate, which depends upon successive speakers meeting in their speeches to some extent the arguments of earlier speeches; debate is more than a series of set speeches prepared beforehand without reference to each other. For the same reason, the Speaker has urged Members to remain in their places after they have spoken and to return to the House for the concluding speeches of a debate.
(cut paragraph for space, about being present at start of debate, remaining as much as possible etc, making reference to the speeches of others - in line with that one's owns peech should not be all prepared and read out - and the select committee on modernization endorsing these principles)
Unless appealed to, the Chair does not normally intervene to enforce the rule against reading a speech; and, unless there is good ground in the interests of the debate for intervening, the matter is usually passed off with a remark to the effect that the notes used by the honourable Member appear to be unusually full. The rule against reading speeches is in any case relaxed for opening speeches or whenever there is special reason for precision, as in important ministerial statements, notably on foreign affairs, in matters involving agreements with outside bodies or in highly technical bills. Even at a later stage, prepared statements on such subjects may be read without objection being taken, though they should not constitute an entire speech. The rule is also relaxed for Members making their maiden speech, about which guidance is now given to new Members. The reading of speeches is even less suited to a committee than to the House itself.
In March 2011, the Speaker announced that, in the light of the recommendations of the Procedure Committee, he did not believe that the occupant of the Chair could reasonably prevent a Member from discreetly using a hand-held electronic device (such as a tablet) as an aide memoire while addressing the House.
Oh, good response - I apologise. But I'm afraid I continue to maintain that it was commonplace.
Well it has made my day to come out on parliamentary procedure ahead of a former MP, thank you kle . Mordaunt is clearly reading out both speeches; whilst the lead off on the reply to the loyal address is perhaps forgivable, the cock speech doesn't benefit from being read out.
@HYUFD Why would those who voted for Corbyn switch to voting for JRM? May was a Remainer, but she totally embraced Brexit during the GE. She was willingly to implement a Hard Brexit, just as a true Brexiteer would be. The idea that a more hardline stance on Brexit would have delivered a majority goes against the information we know about the GE: that a significant number of Conservative Remainers switched to Labour, and that voters under 45 moved towards Labour in significant numbers, many of which voted Remain and dislike the social conservatism associated with the Brexit project. Also I don’t see JRM appealing to the economic concerns of these voters re the cost of living and home ownership.
Corbyn did better not just ‘because he spoke with conviction’ but because he is was able to mobilise those disaffected by the current economic status quo, those who were socially liberal and disliked Brexit and those - particularly students - who simply felt that the establishment were not listening to their concerns, into an effective electoral coalition. It remains to be seen just how a right winger can expand the Conservative’s coalition of suppport as Corbyn did with Labour.
Why would JRM need to win most voters from Corbyn? The Tories still have most votes and seats. Those who left did so mainly over the dementia tax and that was because the Tories were not clear enough on a tax cutting agenda, he also needs working class Labour Leavers who backed Corbyn precisely because he promised to end free movement and leave the single market, especially if Corbyn dilutes that. The Tories need to fight with passion and conviction, the days for squidgy capitulating are over
Your thesis that only a centrist Remainer will do is proved completely and utterly wrong by this Survation poll in July. Under May the Tories were on 38.8%, under a hypothetical Davis leadership on 38.5%, under Boris on 38.9%, under Rudd on 37% and under Hammond on 36.7%.
So the Tories actually LOST voteshare under Rudd and Hammond while the Tory vote held up under Davis and Boris relative to May.
The last thing Tories need to do is listen to leftwingers like you who just want them to capitulate to as centre left agenda as you can get them to and to reverse Brexit, Labour did not listen to Tories when they elected Corbyn and neither should Tories listen to Labour supporters when electing the successor to May.
You Tories seem to have difficulty reconciling your 'advice' to (and predictions for) Labour, based on traditional electoral realities, with your personal preferences for your own party.
And Corbyn at least has the advantage of tapping straight into many of the reasons for discontent with the current economic settlement, even if his solutions are half baked.
Going back to what kick-started this discussion, I didn't say that most Conservative voters would defect if the party shifted Left. But, they would do if the party "deBrexified " and told Brexit supporters to get out, as William Glenn wishes.
@HYUFD Why would those who voted for Corbyn switch to voting for JRM? May was a Remainer, but she totally embraced Brexit during the GE. She was willingly to implement a Hard Brexit, just as a true Brexiteer would be. The idea that a more hardline stance on Brexit would have delivered a majority goes against the information we know about the GE: that a significant number of Conservative Remainers switched to Labour, and that voters under 45 moved towards Labour in significant numbers, many of which voted Remain and dislike the social conservatism associated with the Brexit project. Also I don’t see JRM appealing to the economic concerns of these voters re the cost of living and home ownership.
Corbyn did better not just ‘because he spoke with conviction’ but because he is was able to mobilise those disaffected by the current economic status quo, those who were socially liberal and disliked Brexit and those - particularly students - who simply felt that the establishment were not listening to their concerns, into an effective electoral coalition. It remains to be seen just how a right winger can expand the Conservative’s coalition of suppport as Corbyn did with Labour.
The Conservatives need to discover aspiration again.
In particular they need new policies on higher education funding and home ownership.
They need to detoxify the party from the damage that Cameron and Osborne did.
Just as a rising tide floats all boats, an ebbing tide grounds all boats.
For the decade after Brexit we are on the ebb tide. Selling aspiration when it is put of reach will only anger the have nots.
The ebb tide decade is going to happen irrespective of Brexit.
But that doesn't mean there can't be aspiration if you chose the right areas.
A lower exchange rate (and the pound is definately heading lower) will help those in wealth creating sectors and lower house prices will give opportunities to the financially secure.
Those who have piled up the debt or who don't have a skillset useful in a globalised world will have it tough though.
@HYUFD LOL at that last point. Left wingers like me have been told forever to listen to right wingers like you, and to constantly cede ground on issues such as welfare in order to do well at GEs, instead of fighting for what we believe in. The Left have been told for decades to capitulate to a centre-right agenda. Just don’t like it now that the shoe is on the other foot.
Also, I didn’t specifically express a preference for a Remainer or a Leaver as a future Tory leader, I simply argued against a right winger being the solution and someone who wanted to pursue a Hard Brexit. Not all Leavers are Hard Brexiteers. But that poll doesn’t disapprove such a thesis: because I never argued that ‘any’ Remainer will make ground for the Tories. All that poll shows is how terrible the leadership options are for the Conservatives - none of them can expand the Tories Coalition of voters.
The problem with your thesis ‘the Tories need to mobile the right in response’ is that during the GE they did mobilise the right - that’s why much of the UKIP vote went their way, for example. But the trouble is, in mobilising the right they acted as a recruiting sergeant for Corbyn’s Labour Party.
Also, if Labour Leavers didn’t go Tory after them being that hardline on immigration then they likely never will. Labour Leavers care about more than just immigration - it was also Corbyn’s economic message which appealed to them - something JRM is not likely to imitate.
Also, I didn’t say they would have to win most voters from Corbyn. Just that why would those who voted for Corbyn switch to JRM. They are going to need some Corbyn voters to swing their way.
@HYUFD Why would those who voted for Corbyn switch to voting for JRM? May was a Remainer, but she totally embraced Brexit during the GE. She was willingly to implement a Hard Brexit, just as a true Brexiteer would be. The idea that a more hardline stance on Brexit would have delivered a majority goes against the information we know about the GE: that a significant number of Conservative Remainers switched to Labour, and that voters under 45 moved towards Labour in significant numbers, many of which voted Remain and dislike the social conservatism associated with the Brexit project. Also I don’t see JRM appealing to the economic concerns of these voters re the cost of living and home ownership.
Corbyn did better not just ‘because he spoke with conviction’ but because he is was able to mobilise those disaffected by the current economic status quo, those who were socially liberal and disliked Brexit and those - particularly students - who simply felt that the establishment were not listening to their concerns, into an effective electoral coalition. It remains to be seen just how a right winger can expand the Conservative’s coalition of suppport as Corbyn did with Labour.
The Conservatives need to discover aspiration again.
In particular they need new policies on higher education funding and home ownership.
They need to detoxify the party from the damage that Cameron and Osborne did.
I think Osborne did a lot of damage, but it’s not primarily/just him who toxified the Conservatives with younger voters - Brexiteers have contributed a great deal towards that, especially in light of the wider social agenda that many have which we notably saw re Heaton-Harris.
I really doubt that those people concerned with 'the wider social agenda' would ever vote Conservative.
What we have now is Labour offering money and hope to the young while the Conservatives have financially shat on them for seven years.
So much of the under 45s won’t ever vote Tory? That’s a view.
Even some Conservative voters are concerned with the social agenda of Brexiteers e.g. some on the left of the Tory party.
BBC on Boris showed an Iranian commentator saying that Boris did misspeak and Iran are taking advantage but ironically the story has created news World wide and highlighted the injustice of the position and that Iran is coming under pressure from across the World to release the lady.
Boris is not that much of a genius to have engineered this is he
BBC on Boris showed an Iranian commentator saying that Boris did misspeak and Iran are taking advantage but ironically the story has created news World wide and highlighted the injustice of the position and that Iran is coming under pressure from across the World to release the lady.
Boris is not that much of a genius to have engineered this is he
QTWTAIN.
If nothing else, even if it was, and it worked, he would then not ever be able to do it again, or many other things.
BBC on Boris showed an Iranian commentator saying that Boris did misspeak and Iran are taking advantage but ironically the story has created news World wide and highlighted the injustice of the position and that Iran is coming under pressure from across the World to release the lady.
Boris is not that much of a genius to have engineered this is he
QTWTAIN.
If nothing else, even if it was, and it worked, he would then not ever be able to do it again, or many other things.
Boris is a bit like Brexit.
If she gets a longer sentence, it will be "Because of Boris".
BBC on Boris showed an Iranian commentator saying that Boris did misspeak and Iran are taking advantage but ironically the story has created news World wide and highlighted the injustice of the position and that Iran is coming under pressure from across the World to release the lady.
Boris is not that much of a genius to have engineered this is he
QTWTAIN.
If nothing else, even if it was, and it worked, he would then not ever be able to do it again, or many other things.
I would have thought it was fake news but for the BBC presenting it perfectly reasonably and from Iran
@HYUFD Why would those who voted for Corbyn switch to voting for JRM? May was a Remainer, but she totally embraced Brexit during the GE. She was willingly to implement a Hard Brexit, just as a true Brexiteer would be. The idea that a more hardline stance on Brexit would have delivered a majority goes against the information we know about the GE: that a significant number of Conservative Remainers switched to Labour, and that voters under 45 moved towards Labour in significant numbers, many of which voted Remain and dislike the social conservatism associated with the Brexit project. Also I don’t see JRM appealing to the economic concerns of these voters re the cost of living and home ownership.
Corbyn did better not just ‘because he spoke with conviction’ but because he is was able to mobilise those disaffected by the current economic status quo, those who were socially liberal and disliked Brexit and those - particularly students - who simply felt that the establishment were not listening to their concerns, into an effective electoral coalition. It remains to be seen just how a right winger can expand the Conservative’s coalition of suppport as Corbyn did with Labour.
Why would JRM need to win most voters from Corbyn? The Tories still have most votes and seats. Those who left did so mainly over the dementia tax and that was because the Tories were not clear enough on a tax cutting agenda, he also needs working class Labour Leavers who backed Corbyn precisely because he promised to end free movement and leave the single market, especially if Corbyn dilutes that. The Tories need to fight with passion and conviction, the days for squidgy capitulating are over
Your thesis that only a centrist Remainer will do is proved completely and utterly wrong by this Survation poll in July. Under May the Tories were on 38.8%, under a hypothetical Davis leadership on 38.5%, under Boris on 38.9%, under Rudd on 37% and under Hammond on 36.7%.
So the Tories actually LOST voteshare under Rudd and Hammond while the Tory vote held up under Davis and Boris relative to May.
The last thing Tories needsuccessor to May.
You Tories seem to have difficulty reconciling your 'advice' to (and predictions for) Labour, based on traditional electoral realities, with your personal preferences for your own party.
And Corbyn at least has the advantage of tapping straight into many of the reasons for discontent with the current economic settlement, even if his solutions are half baked.
No, my advice for Labour was to pick Burnham, who like Corbyn would have tapped into much the leftwing resentment at austerity etc, certainly more than say Kendall or Cooper but also have more appeal to the centre than Corbyn would have done.
@HYUFD Why would those who voted for Corbyn switch to voting for JRM? May was a Remainer, but she totally embraced Brexit during the GE. She was willingly to implement a Hard Brexit, just as a true Brexiteer would be. The idea that a more hardline stance on Brexit would have delivered a majority goes against the information we know about the GE: that a significant number of Conservative Remainers switched to Labour, and that voters under 45 moved towards Labour in significant numbers, many of which voted Remain and dislike the social conservatism associated with the Brexit project. Also I don’t see JRM appealing to the economic concerns of these voters re the cost of living and home ownership.
Corbyn did better not just ‘because he spoke with conviction’ but because he is was able to mobilise those disaffected by the current economic status quo, those who were socially liberal and disliked Brexit and those - particularly students - who simply felt that the establishment were not listening to their concerns, into an effective electoral coalition. It remains to be seen just how a right winger can expand the Conservative’s coalition of suppport as Corbyn did with Labour.
The Conservatives need to discover aspiration again.
In particular they need new policies on higher education funding and home ownership.
They need to detoxify the party from the damage that Cameron and Osborne did.
I think Osborne did a lot of damage, but it’s not primarily/just him who toxified the Conservatives with younger voters - Brexiteers have contributed a great deal towards that, especially in light of the wider social agenda that many have which we notably saw re Heaton-Harris.
I really doubt that those people concerned with 'the wider social agenda' would ever vote Conservative.
What we have now is Labour offering money and hope to the young while the Conservatives have financially shat on them for seven years.
So much of the under 45s won’t ever vote Tory? That’s a view.
Even some Conservative voters are concerned with the social agenda of Brexiteers e.g. some on the left of the Tory party.
You will slowly but surely get more Tory and Brexity as you get older. When I was your young and tender age, I was a real fan of Tony Blair and of the EU
BBC on Boris showed an Iranian commentator saying that Boris did misspeak and Iran are taking advantage but ironically the story has created news World wide and highlighted the injustice of the position and that Iran is coming under pressure from across the World to release the lady.
Boris is not that much of a genius to have engineered this is he
QTWTAIN.
If nothing else, even if it was, and it worked, he would then not ever be able to do it again, or many other things.
I would have thought it was fake news but for the BBC presenting it perfectly reasonably and from Iran
It's the idea he would engineer a cock up, being confident enough in eventual success, that I find implausible, particularly when he is known for gaffes anyway.
@HYUFD Why would those who voted for Corbyn switch to voting for JRM? May was a Remainer, but she totally embraced Brexit during the GE. She was willingly to implement a Hard Brexit, just as a true Brexiteer would be. The idea that a more hardline stance on Brexit would have delivered a majority goes against the information we know about the GE: that a significant number of Conservative Remainers switched to Labour, and that voters under 45 moved towards Labour in significant numbers, many of which voted Remain and dislike the social conservatism associated with the Brexit project. Also I don’t see JRM appealing to the economic concerns of these voters re the cost of living and home ownership.
Corbyn did better not just ‘because he spoke with conviction’ but because he is was able to mobilise those disaffected by the current economic status quo, those who were socially liberal and disliked Brexit and those - particularly students - who simply felt that the establishment were not listening to their concerns, into an effective electoral coalition. It remains to be seen just how a right winger can expand the Conservative’s coalition of suppport as Corbyn did with Labour.
The Conservatives need to discover aspiration again.
In particular they need new policies on higher education funding and home ownership.
They need to detoxify the party from the damage that Cameron and Osborne did.
I think Osborne did a lot of damage, but it’s not primarily/just him who toxified the Conservatives with younger voters - Brexiteers have contributed a great deal towards that, especially in light of the wider social agenda that many have which we notably saw re Heaton-Harris.
I really doubt that those people concerned with 'the wider social agenda' would ever vote Conservative.
What we have now is Labour offering money and hope to the young while the Conservatives have financially shat on them for seven years.
So much of the under 45s won’t ever vote Tory? That’s a view.
Even some Conservative voters are concerned with the social agenda of Brexiteers e.g. some on the left of the Tory party.
Its about money.
People might like to dress it up with higher causes but when it comes down to it its the money that matters. And on that the Conservatives have been varying degrees of bad on the young these past seven years.
Apart from that there are some people who will never vote Conservative (just as there are some people who will never vote Labour) and these people aren't going to do so whether the Conservatives have the social agenda of Cameron or of Brexiteers.
What is the social agenda of Brexiteers in any case ?
@HYUFD Why would those who voted for Corbyn switch to voting for JRM? May was a Remainer, but she totally embraced Brexit during the GE. She was willingly to implement a Hard Brexit, just as a true Brexiteer would be. The idea that a more hardline stance on Brexit would have delivered a majority goes against the information we know about the GE: that a significant number of Conservative Remainers switched to Labour, and that voters under 45 moved towards Labour in significant numbers, many of which voted Remain and dislike the social conservatism associated with the Brexit project. Also I don’t see JRM appealing to the economic concerns of these voters re the cost of living and home ownership.
Corbyn did better not just ‘because he spoke with conviction’ but because he is was able to mobilise those disaffected by the current economic status quo, those who were socially liberal and disliked Brexit and those - particularly students - who simply felt that the establishment were not listening to their concerns, into an effective electoral coalition. It remains to be seen just how a right winger can expand the Conservative’s coalition of suppport as Corbyn did with Labour.
Why would JRM need to win most voters from Corbyn? The Tories still have most votes and seats. Those who left did so mainly over the dementia tax and that was because the Tories were not clear enough on a tax cutting agenda, he also needs working class Labour Leavers who backed Corbyn precisely because he promised to end free movement and leave the single market, especially if Corbyn dilutes that. The Tories need to fight with passion and conviction, the days for squidgy capitulating are over
(Snip)
So the Tories actually LOST voteshare under Rudd and Hammond while the Tory vote held up under Davis and Boris relative to May.
The last thing Tories needsuccessor to May.
You Tories seem to have difficulty reconciling your 'advice' to (and predictions for) Labour, based on traditional electoral realities, with your personal preferences for your own party.
And Corbyn at least has the advantage of tapping straight into many of the reasons for discontent with the current economic settlement, even if his solutions are half baked.
No, my advice for Labour was to pick Burnham, who like Corbyn would have tapped into much the leftwing resentment at austerity etc, certainly more than say Kendall or Cooper but also have more appeal to the centre than Corbyn (or JRM in the Tory case) would have done.
BBC on Boris showed an Iranian commentator saying that Boris did misspeak and Iran are taking advantage but ironically the story has created news World wide and highlighted the injustice of the position and that Iran is coming under pressure from across the World to release the lady.
Boris is not that much of a genius to have engineered this is he
QTWTAIN.
If nothing else, even if it was, and it worked, he would then not ever be able to do it again, or many other things.
Boris is a bit like Brexit.
If she gets a longer sentence, it will be "Because of Boris".
If she gets released, it will be "Despite Boris".
Eh, how would that not be justified? I don't think there was even the possibility of her getting a longer sentence before Boris made his comment.
Corbyn did better not just ‘because he spoke with conviction’ but because he is was able to mobilise those disaffected by the current economic status quo, those who were socially liberal and disliked Brexit and those - particularly students - who simply felt that the establishment were not listening to their concerns, into an effective electoral coalition. It remains to be seen just how a right winger can expand the Conservative’s coalition of suppport as Corbyn did with Labour.
The Conservatives need to discover aspiration again.
In particular they need new policies on higher education funding and home ownership.
They need to detoxify the party from the damage that Cameron and Osborne did.
I think Osborne did a lot of damage, but it’s not primarily/just him who toxified the Conservatives with younger voters - Brexiteers have contributed a great deal towards that, especially in light of the wider social agenda that many have which we notably saw re Heaton-Harris.
I really doubt that those people concerned with 'the wider social agenda' would ever vote Conservative.
What we have now is Labour offering money and hope to the young while the Conservatives have financially shat on them for seven years.
So much of the under 45s won’t ever vote Tory? That’s a view.
Even some Conservative voters are concerned with the social agenda of Brexiteers e.g. some on the left of the Tory party.
Its about money.
People might like to dress it up with higher causes but when it comes down to it its the money that matters. And on that the Conservatives have been varying degrees of bad on the young these past seven years.
Apart from that there are some people who will never vote Conservative (just as there are some people who will never vote Labour) and these people aren't going to do so whether the Conservatives have the social agenda of Cameron or of Brexiteers.
What is the social agenda of Brexiteers in any case ?
Re the social agenda of Brexiteers: Seems to be that of Paul Dacre, as I said upthread.
It’s money + social attitudes that’s the issue for the Tories.
BBC on Boris showed an Iranian commentator saying that Boris did misspeak and Iran are taking advantage but ironically the story has created news World wide and highlighted the injustice of the position and that Iran is coming under pressure from across the World to release the lady.
Boris is not that much of a genius to have engineered this is he
QTWTAIN.
If nothing else, even if it was, and it worked, he would then not ever be able to do it again, or many other things.
I would have thought it was fake news but for the BBC presenting it perfectly reasonably and from Iran
It's the idea he would engineer a cock up, being confident enough in eventual success, that I find implausible, particularly when he is known for gaffes anyway.
@HYUFD LOL at that last point. Left wingers like me have been told forever to listen to right wingers like you, and to constantly cede ground on issues such as welfare in order to do well at GEs, instead of fighting for what we believe in. The Left have been told for decades to capitulate to a centre-right agenda. Just don’t like it now that the shoe is on the other foot.
Also, I didn’t specifically express a preference for a Remainer or a Leaver as a future Tory leader, I simply argued right - that’s why much of the UKIP vote went their way, for example. But the trouble is, in mobilising the right they acted as a recruiting sergeant for Corbyn’s Labour Party.
Also, if Labour Leavers didn’t go Tory after them being that hardline on immigration then they likely never will. Labour Leavers care about more than just immigration - it was also Corbyn’s economic message which appealed to them - something JRM is not likely to imitate.
Also, I didn’t say they would have to win most voters from Corbyn. Just that why would those who voted for Corbyn switch to JRM. They are going to need some Corbyn voters to swing their way.
Rightwingers have been told forever to accept uncontrolled immigration, socially liberal policies, ever closer integration of the UK into the European Union etc instead of fighting for what they believe in too. The right may have won the economic war in large part but the left clearly won the culture war, someone like JRM or even Davis at least stands up for traditional conservative values.
The Tories did not 'mobilise the right' that is the whole point, May's biggest mistake was tax raising plans like the disastrous 'dementia tax' rather than a clear tax cutting agenda. To illustrate the point voters in all parties, not just Tories, think inheritance tax is 'unfair.' https://yougov.co.uk/news/2015/03/19/inheritance-tax-most-unfair/ Yet the Tories wanted to take people's house if they needed personal care for dementia, a total betrayal of core conservative principles.
Labour Leavers voted Leave to reduce immigration, Corbyn promised to end free movement and do that so they were free to vote Labour to protest against austerity, if Corbyn ends up leaving free movement in place they are back in play for the Tories.
Corbyn did better not just ‘because he spoke with conviction’ but because he is was able to mobilise those disaffected by the current economic status quo, those who were socially liberal and disliked Brexit and those - particularly students - who simply felt that the establishment were not listening to their concerns, into an effective electoral coalition. It remains to be seen just how a right winger can expand the Conservative’s coalition of suppport as Corbyn did with Labour.
The Conservatives need to discover aspiration again.
In particular they need new policies on higher education funding and home ownership.
They need to detoxify the party from the damage that Cameron and Osborne did.
I think Osborne did a lot of damage, but it’s not primarily/just him who toxified the Conservatives with younger voters - Brexiteers have contributed a great deal towards that, especially in light of the wider social agenda that many have which we notably saw re Heaton-Harris.
I really doubt that those people concerned with 'the wider social agenda' would ever vote Conservative.
What we have now is Labour offering money and hope to the young while the Conservatives have financially shat on them for seven years.
So much of the under 45s won’t ever vote Tory? That’s a view.
Even some Conservative voters are concerned with the social agenda of Brexiteers e.g. some on the left of the Tory party.
Its about money.
People might like to dress it up with higher causes but when it comes down to it its the money that matters. And on that the Conservatives have been varying degrees of bad on the young these past seven years.
Apart from that there are some people who will never vote Conservative (just as there are some people who will never vote Labour) and these people aren't going to do so whether the Conservatives have the social agenda of Cameron or of Brexiteers.
What is the social agenda of Brexiteers in any case ?
Re the social agenda of Brexiteers: Seems to be that of Paul Dacre, as I said upthread.
It’s money + social attitudes that’s the issue for the Tories.
Matthew Parris says it is all the voters fault on C4 Times debate 'The problem is not the politicians but that we have the worst electorate of modern times' after Nick Ferrari said 'we have the worst politicians of modern times.'
@HYUFD Why would those who voted for Corbyn switch to voting for JRM? May was a Remainer, but she totally embraced Brexit during the GE. She was willingly to implement a Hard Brexit, just as a true Brexiteer would be. The idea that a more hardline stance on Brexit would have delivered a majority goes against the information we know about the GE: that a significant number of Conservative Remainers switched to Labour, and that voters under 45 moved towards Labour in significant numbers, many of which voted Remain and dislike the social conservatism associated with the Brexit project. Also I don’t see JRM appealing to the economic concerns of these voters re the cost of living and home ownership.
Corbyn did better not just ‘because he spoke with conviction’ but because he is was able to mobilise those disaffected by the current economic status quo, those who were socially liberal and disliked Brexit and those - particularly students - who simply felt that the establishment were not listening to their concerns, into an effective electoral coalition. It remains to be seen just how a right winger can expand the Conservative’s coalition of suppport as Corbyn did with Labour.
The Conservatives need to discover aspiration again.
In particular they need new policies on higher education funding and home ownership.
They need to detoxify the party from the damage that Cameron and Osborne did.
I think Osborne did a lot of damage, but it’s not primarily/just him who toxified the Conservatives with younger voters - Brexiteers have contributed a great deal towards that, especially in light of the wider social agenda that many have which we notably saw re Heaton-Harris.
I really doubt that those people concerned with 'the wider social agenda' would ever vote Conservative.
What we have now is Labour offering money and hope to the young while the Conservatives have financially shat on them for seven years.
So much of the under 45s won’t ever vote Tory? That’s a view.
Even some Conservative voters are concerned with the social agenda of Brexiteers e.g. some on the left of the Tory party.
You will slowly but surely get more Tory and Brexity as you get older. When I was your young and tender age, I was a real fan of Tony Blair and of the EU
I'm 51 this month....when can I expect to be more tory and Brexity? Given the last 6 months I'm moving the other way. Maybe I am Benjamin Button?
@HYUFD LOL at that last point. Left wingers like me have been told forever to listen to right wingers like you, and to constantly cede ground on issues such as welfare in order to do well at GEs, instead of fighting for what we believe in. The Left have been told for decades to capitulate to a centre-right agenda. Just don’t like it now that the shoe is on the other foot.
Also, I didn’t specifically express a preference for a Remainer or a Leaver as a future Tory leader, I simply argued right - that’s why much of the UKIP vote went their way, for example. But the trouble is, in mobilising the right they acted as a recruiting sergeant for Corbyn’s Labour Party.
Also, if Labour Leavers didn’t go Tory after them being that hardline on immigration then they likely never will. Labour Leavers care about more than just immigration - it was also Corbyn’s economic message which appealed to them - something JRM is not likely to imitate.
Also, I didn’t say they would have to win most voters from Corbyn. Just that why would those who voted for Corbyn switch to JRM. They are going to need some Corbyn voters to swing their way.
Rightwingers have been told forever to accept uncontrolled immigration, socially liberal policies, ever closer integration of the UK into the European Union etc instead of fighting for what they believe in too. The right may have won the economic war in large part but the left clearly won the culture war, someone like JRM or even Davis at least stands up for traditional conservative values.
The Tories did not 'mobilise the right' that is the whole point, May's biggest mistake was tax raising plans like the disastrous 'dementia tax' rather than a clear tax cutting agenda. To illustrate the point voters in all parties, not just Tories, think inheritance tax is 'unfair.' https://yougov.co.uk/news/2015/03/19/inheritance-tax-most-unfair/ Yet the Tories wanted to take people's house if they needed personal care for dementia, a total betrayal of core conservative principles.
Labour Leavers voted Leave to reduce immigration, Corbyn promised to end free movement and do that so they were free to vote Labour to protest against austerity, if Corbyn ends up leaving free movement in place they are back in play for the Tories.
Not if you have nothing to address their economic concerns, they are not. Even Mrs May realises that, despite being powerless to do anything about it.
BBC on Boris showed an Iranian commentator saying that Boris did misspeak and Iran are taking advantage but ironically the story has created news World wide and highlighted the injustice of the position and that Iran is coming under pressure from across the World to release the lady.
Boris is not that much of a genius to have engineered this is he
QTWTAIN.
If nothing else, even if it was, and it worked, he would then not ever be able to do it again, or many other things.
I would have thought it was fake news but for the BBC presenting it perfectly reasonably and from Iran
It's the idea he would engineer a cock up, being confident enough in eventual success, that I find implausible, particularly when he is known for gaffes anyway.
I agree but if she comes home he is safe
safe off the hook for the time being/until the next mess up.
I'm 51 this month....when can I expect to be more tory and Brexity? Given the last 6 months I'm moving the other way. Maybe I am Benjamin Button?
I am slightly older than you, but I have not moved leftward. I have sat here and watched the Brexit loons and the ageing membership drag the Tory party past me and well over to the right.
@HYUFD It’s the right which have shaped this anti-immigration narrative over the last couple of decades through ideological kindred spirits in the press such as the DM and The Sun. It’s the Left who have been told home and time again that they have to cede to the right’s narratives on immigration and race, now more than ever.
It is also right wingers and the right wing press in particular which contributed to the instinctive euroscepticism.
The Tories did mobilise the right that’s why they increased their vote share with Kippers and older voters. The dementia tax being a disaster doesn’t change that. They mobilised the right in spite of that.
Voters being against the IT does not challenge the recent data that voters are willingly to pay higher taxes on public services.
So your thesis on Labour Leavers is based on hypotheticals totally? Great....
Corbyn did better not just ‘because he spoke with conviction’ but because he is was able to mobilise those disaffected by the current economic status quo, those who were socially liberal and disliked Brexit and those - particularly students - who simply felt that the establishment were not listening to their concerns, into an effective electoral coalition. It remains to be seen just how a right winger can expand the Conservative’s coalition of suppport as Corbyn did with Labour.
The Conservatives need to discover aspiration again.
In particular they need new policies on higher education funding and home ownership.
They need to detoxify the party from the damage that Cameron and Osborne did.
I think Osborne did a lot of damage, but it’s not primarily/just him who toxified the Conservatives with younger voters - Brexiteers have contributed a great deal towards that, especially in light of the wider social agenda that many have which we notably saw re Heaton-Harris.
I really doubt that those people concerned with 'the wider social agenda' would ever vote Conservative.
What we have now is Labour offering money and hope to the young while the Conservatives have financially shat on them for seven years.
So much of the under 45s won’t ever vote Tory? That’s a view.
Even some Conservative voters are concerned with the social agenda of Brexiteers e.g. some on the left of the Tory party.
Its about money.
People might like to dress it up with higher causes but when it comes down to it its the money that matters. And on that the Conservatives have been varying degrees of bad on the young these past seven years.
Apart from that there are some people who will never vote Conservative (just as there are some people who will never vote Labour) and these people aren't going to do so whether the Conservatives have the social agenda of Cameron or of Brexiteers.
What is the social agenda of Brexiteers in any case ?
Re the social agenda of Brexiteers: Seems to be that of Paul Dacre, as I said upthread.
It’s money + social attitudes that’s the issue for the Tories.
The same Paul Dacre who Cameron and Brown and Blair pandered to ?
And what does this social agenda mean in practice ?
Now I don't read the Mail but two things which come to mind is the sidebar of sleb gossip and the Stephen Lawrence campaign.
Is Dacre advocating making homosexuality or abortion illegal perhaps ?
Rightwingers have been told forever to accept uncontrolled immigration, socially liberal policies, ever closer integration of the UK into the European Union etc instead of fighting for what they believe in too. The right may have won the economic war in large part but the left clearly won the culture war, someone like JRM or even Davis at least stands up for traditional conservative values.
The Tories did not 'mobilise the right' that is the whole point, May's biggest mistake was tax raising plans like the disastrous 'dementia tax' rather than a clear tax cutting agenda. To illustrate the point voters in all parties, not just Tories, think inheritance tax is 'unfair.' https://yougov.co.uk/news/2015/03/19/inheritance-tax-most-unfair/ Yet the Tories wanted to take people's house if they needed personal care for dementia, a total betrayal of core conservative principles.
Labour Leavers voted Leave to reduce immigration, Corbyn promised to end free movement and do that so they were free to vote Labour to protest against austerity, if Corbyn ends up leaving free movement in place they are back in play for the Tories.
Who should pay for peoples end of life care, if not themselves/their family?
The dementia tax is conservatism. The closer to the individual/family paying for 100% of their own care costs, the purer the conservatism.
True conservatism demands that people liquidate their own assets rather than rely on others via the state.
@HYUFD LOL at that last point. Left wingers like me have been told forever to listen to right wingers like you, and to constantly cede ground on issues such as welfare in order to do well at GEs, instead of fighting for what we believe in. The Left have been told for decades to capitulate to a centre-right agenda. Just don’t like it now that the shoe is on the other foot.
Also, I didn’t specifically express a preference for a Remainer or a Leaver as a future Tory leader, I simply argued right - that’s why much of the UKIP vote went their way, for example. But the trouble is, in mobilising the right they acted as a recruiting sergeant for Corbyn’s Labour Party.
Also, if Labour Leavers didn’t go Tory after them being that hardline on immigration then they likely never will. Labour Leavers care about more than just immigration - it was also Corbyn’s economic message which appealed to them - something JRM is not likely to imitate.
Also, I didn’t say they would have to win most voters from Corbyn. Just that why would those who voted for Corbyn switch to JRM. They are going to need some Corbyn voters to swing their way.
Rightwingers have been told forever to accept uncontrolled immigration, socially liberal policies, ever closer integration of the UK into the European Union etc instead of fighting for what they believe in too. The right may have won the economic war in large part but the left clearly won the culture war, someone like JRM or even Davis at least stands up for traditional conservative values.
The Tories did not 'mobilise the right' that is the whole point, May's biggest mistake was tax raising plans like the disastrous 'dementia tax' rather than a clear tax cutting agenda. To illustrate the point voters in all parties, not just Tories, think inheritance tax is 'unfair.' https://yougov.co.uk/news/2015/03/19/inheritance-tax-most-unfair/ Yet the Tories wanted to take people's house if they needed personal care for dementia, a total betrayal of core conservative principles.
Labour Leavers voted Leave to reduce immigration, Corbyn promised to end free movement and do that so they were free to vote Labour to protest against austerity, if Corbyn ends up leaving free movement in place they are back in play for the Tories.
Not if you have nothing to address their economic concerns, they are not. Even Mrs May realises that, despite being powerless to do anything about it.
Part of their economic concern is that average workers are too heavily taxed.
Matthew Parris says it is all the voters fault on C4 Times debate 'The problem is not the politicians but that we have the worst electorate of modern times' after Nick Ferrari said 'we have the worst politicians of modern times.'
Corbyn did better not just ‘because he spoke with conviction’ but because he is was able to mobilise those disaffected by the current economic status quo, those who were socially liberal and disliked Brexit and those - particularly students - who simply felt that the establishment were not listening to their concerns, into an effective electoral coalition. It remains to be seen just how a right winger can expand the Conservative’s coalition of suppport as Corbyn did with Labour.
The Conservatives need to discover aspiration again.
In particular they need new policies on higher education funding and home ownership.
They need to detoxify the party from the damage that Cameron and Osborne did.
I think Osborne did a lot of damage, but it’s not primarily/just him who toxified the Conservatives with younger voters - Brexiteers have contributed a great deal towards that, especially in light of the wider social agenda that many have which we notably saw re Heaton-Harris.
I really doubt that those people concerned with 'the wider social agenda' would ever vote Conservative.
What we have now is Labour offering money and hope to the young while the Conservatives have financially shat on them for seven years.
So much of the under 45s won’t ever vote Tory? That’s a view.
Even some Conservative voters are concerned with the social agenda of Brexiteers e.g. some on the left of the Tory party.
Its about money.
People might like to dress it up with higher causes but when it comes down to it its the money that matters. And on that the Conservatives have been varying degrees of bad on the young these past seven years.
Apart from that there are some people who will never vote Conservative (just as there are some people who will never vote Labour) and these people aren't going to do so whether the Conservatives have the social agenda of Cameron or of Brexiteers.
What is the social agenda of Brexiteers in any case ?
Re the social agenda of Brexiteers: Seems to be that of Paul Dacre, as I said upthread.
It’s money + social attitudes that’s the issue for the Tories.
Rightwingers have been told forever to accept uncontrolled immigration, socially liberal policies, ever closer integration of the UK into the European Union etc instead of fighting for what they believe in too. The right may have won the economic war in large part but the left clearly won the culture war, someone like JRM or even Davis at least stands up for traditional conservative values.
The Tories did not 'mobilise the right' that is the whole point, May's biggest mistake was tax raising plans like the disastrous 'dementia tax' rather than a clear tax cutting agenda. To illustrate the point voters in all parties, not just Tories, think inheritance tax is 'unfair.' https://yougov.co.uk/news/2015/03/19/inheritance-tax-most-unfair/ Yet the Tories wanted to take people's house if they needed personal care for dementia, a total betrayal of core conservative principles.
Labour Leavers voted Leave to reduce immigration, Corbyn promised to end free movement and do that so they were free to vote Labour to protest against austerity, if Corbyn ends up leaving free movement in place they are back in play for the Tories.
Who should pay for peoples end of life care, if not themselves/their family?
The dementia tax is conservatism. The closer to the individual/family paying for 100% of their own care costs, the purer the conservatism.
True conservatism demands that people liquidate their own assets rather than rely on others via the state.
But it was not perceived as such by Conservative voters. They saw it as an attack on them.
@HYUFD It’s the right which have shaped this anti-immigration narrative over the last couple of decades through ideological kindred spirits in the press such as the DM and The Sun. It’s the Left who have been told home and time again that they have to cede to the right’s narratives on immigration and race, now more than ever.
It is also right wingers and the right wing press in particular which contributed to the instinctive euroscepticism.
The Tories did mobilise the right that’s why they increased their vote share with Kippers and older voters. The dementia tax being a disaster doesn’t change that. They mobilised the right in spite of that.
Voters being against the IT does not challenge the recent data that voters are willingly to pay higher taxes on public services.
So your thesis on Labour Leavers is based on hypotheticals totally? Great....
What rubbish, it is the liberal left who have let immigration rise higher and higher without effective controls in the last decade or two, reaching its peak when Blair did not even agree any transition controls when the Eastern European nations joined the EU in 2004.
It was Blair and Brown and to be fair Major too who signed up to Treaty after Treaty from the EU without once consulting the voters via a referendum on them.
The Tories won 50% of Kippers, Corbyn won 20%, the Tories lost their core vote because of disastrous tax raising policies like the dementia tax which was when the polls started to shift towards Labour. Voters being against tax for themselves is of course key, they are quite happy for the rich to pay more tax.
Rightwingers have been told forever to accept uncontrolled immigration, socially liberal policies, ever closer integration of the UK into the European Union etc instead of fighting for what they believe in too. The right may have won the economic war in large part but the left clearly won the culture war, someone like JRM or even Davis at least stands up for traditional conservative values.
The Tories did not 'mobilise the right' that is the whole point, May's biggest mistake was tax raising plans like the disastrous 'dementia tax' rather than a clear tax cutting agenda. To illustrate the point voters in all parties, not just Tories, think inheritance tax is 'unfair.' https://yougov.co.uk/news/2015/03/19/inheritance-tax-most-unfair/ Yet the Tories wanted to take people's house if they needed personal care for dementia, a total betrayal of core conservative principles.
Labour Leavers voted Leave to reduce immigration, Corbyn promised to end free movement and do that so they were free to vote Labour to protest against austerity, if Corbyn ends up leaving free movement in place they are back in play for the Tories.
Who should pay for peoples end of life care, if not themselves/their family?
The dementia tax is conservatism. The closer to the individual/family paying for 100% of their own care costs, the purer the conservatism.
True conservatism demands that people liquidate their own assets rather than rely on others via the state.
People should pay for future care for social insurance, the cluse is in the title,
The dementia tax was the exact opposite of conservatism, theft by the state of the core family asset.
Of course resentful leftists like you liked it but it certainly is not conservative.
The Conservatives need to discover aspiration again.
In particular they need new policies on higher education funding and home ownership.
They need to detoxify the party from the damage that Cameron and Osborne did.
I really doubt that those people concerned with 'the wider social agenda' would ever vote Conservative.
What we have now is Labour offering money and hope to the young while the Conservatives have financially shat on them for seven years.
So much of the under 45s won’t ever vote Tory? That’s a view.
Even some Conservative voters are concerned with the social agenda of Brexiteers e.g. some on the left of the Tory party.
Its about money.
People might like to dress it up with higher causes but when it comes down to it its the money that matters. And on that the Conservatives have been varying degrees of bad on the young these past seven years.
What is the social agenda of Brexiteers in any case ?
Re the social agenda of Brexiteers: Seems to be that of Paul Dacre, as I said upthread.
It’s money + social attitudes that’s the issue for the Tories.
The same Paul Dacre who Cameron and Brown and Blair pandered to ?
And what does this social agenda mean in practice ?
Now I don't read the Mail but two things which come to mind is the sidebar of sleb gossip and the Stephen Lawrence campaign.
Is Dacre advocating making homosexuality or abortion illegal perhaps ?
Yes, that Paul Dacre. They ‘pandered’ to him because he is a powerful and influential person in the press so they don’t want to get on his bad side, not because they share all his values.
I don’t think the Stephen Lawrence campaign is something younger voters associate with the Mail. I only knew about until much later after I’d accquited a strong dislike for the Mail. It is one of good things they’ve done though.
Social conservatism in this country is not really of the anti-abortion and anti-gay inclination (anymore) the way it is in the states. It’s much more centred on being anti-immigration, anti-multiculturalism, climate change sceptic, pro-Brexit and anti-PC with a scepticism towards academia. Well, we are already seeing what the agenda means in practice since we’re leaving the EU. Heaton-Harris already indicated what the agenda would look like re universities.
The Conservatives need to discover aspiration again.
In particular they need new policies on higher education funding and home ownership.
They need to detoxify the party from the damage that Cameron and Osborne did.
I really doubt that those people concerned with 'the wider social agenda' would ever vote Conservative.
What we have now is Labour offering money and hope to the young while the Conservatives have financially shat on them for seven years.
So much of the under 45s won’t ever vote Tory? That’s a view.
Even some Conservative voters are concerned with the social agenda of Brexiteers e.g. some on the left of the Tory party.
Its about money.
People might like to dress it up with higher causes but when it comes down to it its the money that matters. And on that the Conservatives have been varying degrees of bad on the young these past seven years.
What is the social agenda of Brexiteers in any case ?
Re the social agenda of Brexiteers: Seems to be that of Paul Dacre, as I said upthread.
It’s money + social attitudes that’s the issue for the Tories.
The same Paul Dacre who .
Is Dacre advocating making homosexuality or abortion illegal perhaps ?
Yes, that Paul Dacre. They ‘pandered’ to him because he is a powerful and influential person in the press so they don’t want to get on his bad side, not because they share all his values.
I don’t think the Stephen Lawrence campaign is something younger voters associate with the Mail. I only knew about until much later after I’d accquited a strong dislike for the Mail. It is one of good things they’ve done though.
Social conservatism in this country is not really of the anti-abortion and anti-gay inclination (anymore) the way it is in the states. It’s much more centred on being anti-immigration, anti-multiculturalism, climate change sceptic, pro-Brexit and anti-PC with a scepticism towards academia. Well, we are already seeing what the agenda means in practice since we’re leaving the EU. Heaton-Harris already indicated what the agenda would look like re universities.
Trump social conservatism is in many ways closer to Daily Mail social conservatism than evangelical America social conservatism.
So much of the under 45s won’t ever vote Tory? That’s a view.
Even some Conservative voters are concerned with the social agenda of Brexiteers e.g. some on the left of the Tory party.
Its about money.
People might like to dress it up with higher causes but when it comes down to it its the money that matters. And on that the Conservatives have been varying degrees of bad on the young these past seven years.
What is the social agenda of Brexiteers in any case ?
Re the social agenda of Brexiteers: Seems to be that of Paul Dacre, as I said upthread.
It’s money + social attitudes that’s the issue for the Tories.
The same Paul Dacre who Cameron and Brown and Blair pandered to ?
And what does this social agenda mean in practice ?
Now I don't read the Mail but two things which come to mind is the sidebar of sleb gossip and the Stephen Lawrence campaign.
Is Dacre advocating making homosexuality or abortion illegal perhaps ?
Yes, that Paul Dacre. They ‘pandered’ to him because he is a powerful and influential person in the press so they don’t want to get on his bad side, not because they share all his values.
I don’t think the Stephen Lawrence campaign is something younger voters associate with the Mail. I only knew about until much later after I’d accquited a strong dislike for the Mail. It is one of good things they’ve done though.
Social conservatism in this country is not really of the anti-abortion and anti-gay inclination (anymore) the way it is in the states. It’s much more centred on being anti-immigration, anti-multiculturalism, climate change sceptic, pro-Brexit and anti-PC with a scepticism towards academia. Well, we are already seeing what the agenda means in practice since we’re leaving the EU. Heaton-Harris already indicated what the agenda would look like re universities.
It sounds like there's a lot of displacement activity here.
The opposition to this supposed social agenda is based on prejudice against what Mail readers are supposed to be.
And underlying everything is a need to feel morally superior to 'them'.
And who are 'them' ? The financially secure in the big houses, the people who had free education and good pensions.
And whatever 'they' do and whatever 'they' think it will be wrong.
Because 'they' have the things younger people want.
Comments
https://twitter.com/Sunil_P2/status/876894066478329857
In particular they need new policies on higher education funding and home ownership.
They need to detoxify the party from the damage that Cameron and Osborne did.
https://twitter.com/Brexit/status/928720641032904704
Owned by Michael Bloomberg ?
Shocked I tell you - shocked.
Corbyn won students and leftwingers and mobilised them yes, the Tories need to mobilise the right in response.
Your thesis that only a centrist Remainer will do is proved completely and utterly wrong by this Survation poll in July. Under May the Tories were on 38.8%, under a hypothetical Davis leadership on 38.5%, under Boris on 38.9%, under Rudd on 37% and under Hammond on 36.7%.
http://survation.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/07/Final-MoS-Brexit-Poll-Tables-140717GOCH-1c0d2h4.pdf
So the Tories actually LOST voteshare under Rudd and Hammond while the Tory vote held up under Davis and Boris relative to May.
The last thing Tories need to do is listen to leftwingers like you who just want them to capitulate to as centre left agenda as you can get them to and to reverse Brexit, Labour did not listen to Tories when they elected Corbyn and neither should Tories listen to Labour supporters when electing the successor to May.
I always saw Brexiteers as those who subscribed to the ideology of the Leave project as opposed to those who simply respect the vote.
For the decade after Brexit we are on the ebb tide. Selling aspiration when it is put of reach will only anger the have nots.
https://twitter.com/resi_analyst/status/928548818764861440
What we have now is Labour offering money and hope to the young while the Conservatives have financially shat on them for seven years.
People believe what they want to believe.
And Corbyn at least has the advantage of tapping straight into many of the reasons for discontent with the current economic settlement, even if his solutions are half baked.
https://twitter.com/hecharts/status/928604752790851586
But that doesn't mean there can't be aspiration if you chose the right areas.
A lower exchange rate (and the pound is definately heading lower) will help those in wealth creating sectors and lower house prices will give opportunities to the financially secure.
Those who have piled up the debt or who don't have a skillset useful in a globalised world will have it tough though.
More
It's not often I feel sorry for @NicolaSturgeon, but Salmond taking the Kremlin's rouble on Russia Today? Ooft....
Be LEAVE!
LOL at that last point. Left wingers like me have been told forever to listen to right wingers like you, and to constantly cede ground on issues such as welfare in order to do well at GEs, instead of fighting for what we believe in. The Left have been told for decades to capitulate to a centre-right agenda. Just don’t like it now that the shoe is on the other foot.
Also, I didn’t specifically express a preference for a Remainer or a Leaver as a future Tory leader, I simply argued against a right winger being the solution and someone who wanted to pursue a Hard Brexit. Not all Leavers are Hard Brexiteers. But that poll doesn’t disapprove such a thesis: because I never argued that ‘any’ Remainer will make ground for the Tories. All that poll shows is how terrible the leadership options are for the Conservatives - none of them can expand the Tories Coalition of voters.
The problem with your thesis ‘the Tories need to mobile the right in response’ is that during the GE they did mobilise the right - that’s why much of the UKIP vote went their way, for example. But the trouble is, in mobilising the right they acted as a recruiting sergeant for Corbyn’s Labour Party.
A tax cutting agenda? Yeah, that’s not the way get voters on your side. Many are increasingly in favour of higher taxation these days. https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/amp.theguardian.com/society/2017/sep/16/two-thirds-support-higher-taxes-to-fund-nhs
Also, if Labour Leavers didn’t go Tory after them being that hardline on immigration then they likely never will. Labour Leavers care about more than just immigration - it was also Corbyn’s economic message which appealed to them - something JRM is not likely to imitate.
Also, I didn’t say they would have to win most voters from Corbyn. Just that why would those who voted for Corbyn switch to JRM. They are going to need some Corbyn voters to swing their way.
Even some Conservative voters are concerned with the social agenda of Brexiteers e.g. some on the left of the Tory party.
Boris is not that much of a genius to have engineered this is he
If nothing else, even if it was, and it worked, he would then not ever be able to do it again, or many other things.
@HTScotPol
26m26 minutes ago
SNP MEP @AlynSmith has just given this on the record reaction to Alex Salmond's RT show: "What the fuck is he thinking?"
Boris is a bit like Brexit.
If she gets a longer sentence, it will be "Because of Boris".
If she gets released, it will be "Despite Boris".
People might like to dress it up with higher causes but when it comes down to it its the money that matters. And on that the Conservatives have been varying degrees of bad on the young these past seven years.
Apart from that there are some people who will never vote Conservative (just as there are some people who will never vote Labour) and these people aren't going to do so whether the Conservatives have the social agenda of Cameron or of Brexiteers.
What is the social agenda of Brexiteers in any case ?
It’s money + social attitudes that’s the issue for the Tories.
The Tories did not 'mobilise the right' that is the whole point, May's biggest mistake was tax raising plans like the disastrous 'dementia tax' rather than a clear tax cutting agenda.
To illustrate the point voters in all parties, not just Tories, think inheritance tax is 'unfair.'
https://yougov.co.uk/news/2015/03/19/inheritance-tax-most-unfair/
Yet the Tories wanted to take people's house if they needed personal care for dementia, a total betrayal of core conservative principles.
Labour Leavers voted Leave to reduce immigration, Corbyn promised to end free movement and do that so they were free to vote Labour to protest against austerity, if Corbyn ends up leaving free movement in place they are back in play for the Tories.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xPlEIryW8zA
To me, these days, they seem like UKIP-lite.
It is also right wingers and the right wing press in particular which contributed to the instinctive euroscepticism.
The Tories did mobilise the right that’s why they increased their vote share with Kippers and older voters. The dementia tax being a disaster doesn’t change that. They mobilised the right in spite of that.
Voters being against the IT does not challenge the recent data that voters are willingly to pay higher taxes on public services.
So your thesis on Labour Leavers is based on hypotheticals totally? Great....
And what does this social agenda mean in practice ?
Now I don't read the Mail but two things which come to mind is the sidebar of sleb gossip and the Stephen Lawrence campaign.
Is Dacre advocating making homosexuality or abortion illegal perhaps ?
The dementia tax is conservatism. The closer to the individual/family paying for 100% of their own care costs, the purer the conservatism.
True conservatism demands that people liquidate their own assets rather than rely on others via the state.
It was Blair and Brown and to be fair Major too who signed up to Treaty after Treaty from the EU without once consulting the voters via a referendum on them.
The Tories won 50% of Kippers, Corbyn won 20%, the Tories lost their core vote because of disastrous tax raising policies like the dementia tax which was when the polls started to shift towards Labour. Voters being against tax for themselves is of course key, they are quite happy for the rich to pay more tax.
NEW THREAD
The dementia tax was the exact opposite of conservatism, theft by the state of the core family asset.
Of course resentful leftists like you liked it but it certainly is not conservative.
I don’t think the Stephen Lawrence campaign is something younger voters associate with the Mail. I only knew about until much later after I’d accquited a strong dislike for the Mail. It is one of good things they’ve done though.
Social conservatism in this country is not really of the anti-abortion and anti-gay inclination (anymore) the way it is in the states. It’s much more centred on being anti-immigration, anti-multiculturalism, climate change sceptic, pro-Brexit and anti-PC with a scepticism towards academia. Well, we are already seeing what the agenda means in practice since we’re leaving the EU. Heaton-Harris already indicated what the agenda would look like re universities.
Salmond is no longer a serious political figure. He is a joke.
The opposition to this supposed social agenda is based on prejudice against what Mail readers are supposed to be.
And underlying everything is a need to feel morally superior to 'them'.
And who are 'them' ? The financially secure in the big houses, the people who had free education and good pensions.
And whatever 'they' do and whatever 'they' think it will be wrong.
Because 'they' have the things younger people want.