the snap general election thread

Tromking

stockton wrote: »

It is true that there were always exceptions. Sir Anthony Wedgewood Benn, for example, was typical of many middle class people who identified with Labour.
There were many "Blue collar workers who identified with the tories.

But in general there were huge areas of the country that were known as "Heartlands" of Labour and Conservative support. Hence the old saying that you could put up a dog for election in certain areas and as long as it wore the right colours it would be elected.

Sir Anthony Wedgwood Benn middle class?.....I think you've undershot a tad! 😀

Thrugelmir

Tromking wrote: »

Sir Anthony Wedgwood Benn middle class?.....I think you've undershot a tad! 😀

Shows how much people really know of post war politics.

antrobus

Tromking wrote: »

Sir Anthony Wedgwood Benn middle class?.....I think you've undershot a tad! 😀

He was a bl00dy viscount.

Now granted his dad as made a viscount largely because he was a Labour MP and was given a title to bump up the Labour peers in the Lords during WWII . But his dad was a baronet and also a politician.

Lower upper class I'd say.:)

Whereas someone like Clement Attlee would be upper middle class; wealthy family, prep school etc, despite later becoming an earl. But I think he had a proper job as a social worker before becoming an MP.

BarleyGB

For the first time in my voting life, I would truly call this a one issue election. Whoever is in power in 6 weeks will have the task of dealing with the EU and the rest of the world as we shape Britain's post-EU existence. All the other problems have been there for decades and will be there for decades more, but this is a one-off item that we have to get right, or as right as we can make it, with most likely no second chance for a generation or more. And a deal has to be done: objecting and failing to transact is not an option.

On that basis alone how is it possible to vote for Corbyn, Abbott, McDonnell, Thornbury, Long-Bailey. Almost without exception every interview shows them as vacuous and/or incompetent, the disaster of the labour party is clear for all to see. Labours potential Prime Minister, Chancellor, Home & Foreign Office Minister and Defence minister can't even cope with live interviews, i just imagine the disaster that would unfold if they represented the UK vs Merkel, Junker, Trump, Putin etc. it would be a bloodbath.

chris_m

BarleyGB wrote: »

For the first time in my voting life, I would truly call this a one issue election. Whoever is in power in 6 weeks will have the task of dealing with the EU and the rest of the world as we shape Britain's post-EU existence. All the other problems have been there for decades and will be there for decades more, but this is a one-off item that we have to get right, or as right as we can make it, with most likely no second chance for a generation or more. And a deal has to be done: objecting and failing to transact is not an option.

On that basis alone how is it possible to vote for Corbyn, Abbott, McDonnell, Thornbury, Long-Bailey. Almost without exception every interview shows them as vacuous and/or incompetent, the disaster of the labour party is clear for all to see. Labours potential Prime Minister, Chancellor, Home & Foreign Office Minister and Defence minister can't even cope with live interviews, i just imagine the disaster that would unfold if they represented the UK vs Merkel, Junker, Trump, Putin etc. it would be a bloodbath.

Farron and co. would be even worse - they wouldn't even try.

Filo25

BarleyGB wrote: »

For the first time in my voting life, I would truly call this a one issue election. Whoever is in power in 6 weeks will have the task of dealing with the EU and the rest of the world as we shape Britain's post-EU existence. All the other problems have been there for decades and will be there for decades more, but this is a one-off item that we have to get right, or as right as we can make it, with most likely no second chance for a generation or more. And a deal has to be done: objecting and failing to transact is not an option.

On that basis alone how is it possible to vote for Corbyn, Abbott, McDonnell, Thornbury, Long-Bailey. Almost without exception every interview shows them as vacuous and/or incompetent, the disaster of the labour party is clear for all to see. Labours potential Prime Minister, Chancellor, Home & Foreign Office Minister and Defence minister can't even cope with live interviews, i just imagine the disaster that would unfold if they represented the UK vs Merkel, Junker, Trump, Putin etc. it would be a bloodbath.

But, but they promised free stuff for people!

Unlike many on here I'm no hater of the Labour party generally, but their current front bench is an abomination.

vivatifosi

Filo25 wrote: »

But, but they promised free stuff for people!

Unlike many on here I'm no hater of the Labour party generally, but their current front bench is an abomination.

That's the difficulty isn't it? If you wouldn't naturally vote Tory, or are a floating voter, the alternatives aren't that great. Certainly for those of us who live in England.

Filo25

Westminster voting intention:

CON: 47% (+2)
LAB: 30% (+4)
LDEM: 8% (-3)
UKIP: 7% (-2)

(via Opinium)
Chgs. w/ 19-20 Apr survey.

Thrugelmir

vivatifosi wrote: »

That's the difficulty isn't it? If you wouldn't naturally vote Tory, or are a floating voter, the alternatives aren't that great. Certainly for those of us who live in England.

Corbyn voted against the party leader ( Miilband) having the power to choose the Shadow Cabinet rather than MP's. Now appears he won't relinquish the powers back. Sums up the modern politician. One wonders why they are called Honourable......

BobQ

gfplux wrote: »

Politics was all about class after the Second World War. A blue collar worker voted Labour and a white collar worker voted Tory.
Since that time I think everyone has slowly moved to vote for the Party that communicates the best about the issues that concern them.
I say communicate the best.
Just one example. A low income family with children "might" consider the NHS or Education to be a major issue for them. Whichever party tells the best story might get the family vote.
From a distance I read (correctly or not) that the NHS and Education have some big issues of under funding or efficiency but the Labour Party doesn't seem to be championing these issues.
It seems rather that the Torys (who are presently in charge of these "issues") is not blamed.
Very curious.

Labour has become less popular in the past 30 years for one reason in my view: the change in the type of work we do means that there are less people who think of themselves as working class.

Manual workers once thought of themselves as working class but as they migrated into service industries and desk jobs many saw themselves as middle class. Of course most were not, they were just labourers who used their brains and needed two incomes to survive rather than one, but that did not stop them getting an air of superiority from the fact that they too wore white collars and could afford to buy a house, not understanding that the real middle class was also doing much better.

This meant that the only way of Labour getting elected was to appeal to this vanity (as Blair did). Now many have been convinced that Cameron and May genuinely govern in their best interests. If they do, as many claim, then Labour have simply failed to change with the times. But if it is a big con then these latter day converts to Conservativism will have to learn the hard way.