Why the Tories Won

zagfles

stator wrote: »

They won because for the last 5 years they have persued policies that they knew would upset Lib Dem voters and cause them to implode.

This is rubbish. Anyone who voted LibDem because they liked LibDem policies ought to be delighted with what the coalition did. There was so much LibDem policy implemented and they reined in the Tories on loads of their policies.

They were a minor party in a coalition, so obviously they couldn't get all their policies implemented eg student fees, but they also stopped the Tories getting their flagship policy implemented, ie the rise in IHT threshold, plus stuff like boundary changes.

LibDems lost votes from "anti-Tory" types who were stupid enough to think they'd never do a deal with the Tories, despite evidence from councils up and down the country where they have done for years.

Like I said above the only reason we now have a Tory majority is because of those who switched away from the LibDems. They didn't like the coalition? We'll see how they like a majority Tory govt, which is all their fault.

zagfles

CLAPTON wrote: »

uni students can register to vote at both their uni and their own home

they can vote in local elections at both places
but only vote in national election at one location

What mechanism is in place to stop them voting in national elections at both places? Is one of the registrations flagged as "local only" so the polling officials know only to give them a local election ballot paper?

Otherwise it sounds like a "democratic scandal"

At the very least, it gives them the opportunity to choose the which consitituency to vote in, so if one is a safe Labour/Tory seat and the other is a marginal they can choose the marginal to increase the effectiveness of their vote. More "democratic scandal", perhaps?

lisyloo

If you genuinely live in 2 different places (which I do) then why is it a democratic scandal to choose?
Yes I chose the marginal, but who should decide where I vote and why?

zagfles

lisyloo wrote: »

If you genuinely live in 2 different places (which I do) then why is it a democratic scandal to choose?
Yes I chose the marginal, but who should decide where I vote and why?

It isn't - I was taking the p out of the phrase hence the Although I'm still interested in what the mechanism is to stop you voting twice in national elections. Also what would happen if the two places are close and in the same council (but different wards)? Would you get two votes in the same council election?

robin61

Labour had an awful leader and little credibility on the economy especially with Balls as Chancellor who was tarnished by the previous Labour governments failure.
Voting ukip where the Tories could win was like letting Labour in through the back door.
People in England are getting fed up with the Scots and their grievances and couldn't stand the thought of being held to ransom.
Put all that together and the Tories were the least worst choice.

chewmylegoff

zagfles wrote: »

This is rubbish. Anyone who voted LibDem because they liked LibDem policies ought to be delighted with what the coalition did. There was so much LibDem policy implemented and they reined in the Tories on loads of their policies.

They were a minor party in a coalition, so obviously they couldn't get all their policies implemented eg student fees, but they also stopped the Tories getting their flagship policy implemented, ie the rise in IHT threshold, plus stuff like boundary changes.

LibDems lost votes from "anti-Tory" types who were stupid enough to think they'd never do a deal with the Tories, despite evidence from councils up and down the country where they have done for years.

Like I said above the only reason we now have a Tory majority is because of those who switched away from the LibDems. They didn't like the coalition? We'll see how they like a majority Tory govt, which is all their fault.

Most of the Tory gains were from the lib dems where there was a significant swing from lib dem to Tory.

If e.g. In twickenham, the people abandoning lib dems had all voted green, or labour then Vince cable would have held his seat, but they principally voted Tory.

Anti Tory voters don't tend to vote Tory.

Generali

spirit wrote: »

don't forget the effect of the electoral reforms.

"One of the key components of the reforms is that universities and colleges can no longer block register students living in halls of residences to vote, which Miliband calls a “democratic scandal”.

My DiL works at a university who were trying to get students to register to vote. Not sure how successful they were.

http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2015/jan/16/britains-1m-missing-voters

The students who did vote probably were not about to forgive Clegg re the university fees.

Given that the percentage turnout was the highest for almost 20 years I doubt disenfranchisement was a major problem.

Given that the article itself notes that changes to the system were designed in part to reduce fraud perhaps the changes have done their job and a million non-existant people have been removed from the electoral roll.

More than one party has had the unofficial slogan, "Vote early, vote often".

robin61

Miliband and Balls were not popular and left wing policies have never sat well in most of England.

People were concerned about a Labour / SNP pact. At least the Lib Dems had the best interests of the UK at heart when they went into coalition. You could.hardly say that about a party who's reason for existing is the break up of the UK. People are already fed up with the Scots' grievances and could not stand the thought of being held to ransome or the disproportionate amount of attention that less than a tenth of the UK population have had over the past year.

Voting UKIP where the Tories could win was seen was tantermount to letting Labour / SNP in through the back door.

All things considered the Tories were seen as the least worst option. It is actually a stunning result for the Tories. When they took over 5 years ago I would not have given them any chance at all of even going for the full 5 years never mind a second term with a majority due to the number of unpopular decisions needed to turn the UK's fortunes around.

onlyroz

zagfles wrote: »

What mechanism is in place to stop them voting in national elections at both places? Is one of the registrations flagged as "local only" so the polling officials know only to give them a local election ballot paper?

Otherwise it sounds like a "democratic scandal"

At the very least, it gives them the opportunity to choose the which consitituency to vote in, so if one is a safe Labour/Tory seat and the other is a marginal they can choose the marginal to increase the effectiveness of their vote. More "democratic scandal", perhaps?

No mechanism at all. In 2001 I voted twice.

bigheadxx

zagfles wrote: »

What mechanism is in place to stop them voting in national elections at both places? Is one of the registrations flagged as "local only" so the polling officials know only to give them a local election ballot paper?

Otherwise it sounds like a "democratic scandal"

At the very least, it gives them the opportunity to choose the which consitituency to vote in, so if one is a safe Labour/Tory seat and the other is a marginal they can choose the marginal to increase the effectiveness of their vote. More "democratic scandal", perhaps?

There are two electoral regisrers. One is for parliamentary elections the other for council/EU/Assembly votes.