the snap general election thread

BobQ

davomcdave wrote: »

That can't be true because there were vastly more working class people than middle class.

Alf Garnett was never going to be a Labour voter.

Ah yes, the character brought up in slum who rose to become a labourer working in the London docks, who became a working class Tory blaming foreigners and women going to work for the problems of society.

Thrugelmir

BobQ wrote: »

Ah yes, the character brought up in slum who rose to become a labourer working in the London docks, who became a working class Tory blaming foreigners and women going to work for the problems of society.

Yet many labour supporters of given generation. Still vote Labour. Despite very much having become Middle Class. Often owning second properties and retiring early. Perhaps one becomes preconditioned as a child. Inheriting parents views of the world. Never really changing them.

BobQ

Thrugelmir wrote: »

Yet many labour supporters of given generation. Still vote Labour. Despite very much having become Middle Class. Often owning second properties and retiring early. Perhaps one becomes preconditioned as a child. Inheriting parents views of the world. Never really changing them.

Very true, I guess I am one of them although Mr Corbyn may change that

BobQ

Telegraph/ORB Poll 29 April

Conservative 42
Labour 31
Lib Dem 11
UKIP 8

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2017/04/29/five-key-charts-show-people-will-vote-general-election-according/

Moby

BobQ wrote: »

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.

Good point..... such people have become increasingly apolitical as well and consumerism is a huge driver for them....as is celebrity aspiration.

Filo25

Looking at the polls, while the Tories still have a strong lead, the race has tightened a fair amount over the last week.

I doubt we will continue to see such a passive campaign from the government for much longer.

I didn't see it myself but by all accounts May wasn't particularly impressive on the Sunday morning shows either, she's very fortunate she's facing an opposition as poor as this one.

mrginge

Filo25 wrote: »

Looking at the polls, while the Tories still have a strong lead, the race has tightened a fair amount over the last week.

I doubt we will continue to see such a passive campaign from the government for much longer.

I didn't see it myself but by all accounts May wasn't particularly impressive on the Sunday morning shows either, she's very fortunate she's facing an opposition as poor as this one.

So after years of people complaining about politics being driven by spin and personality, it actually turns out that what we want are leaders who can talk a good game on Peston.

westernpromise

If you look at instances over the last 40-odd years where one party has had a 20-point lead over the other during the campaign, eg 1983, 1997, what actually transpired on the day was about a 13-point lead. I'd be surprised if this time is any different.

BobQ

mrginge wrote: »

So after years of people complaining about politics being driven by spin and personality, it actually turns out that what we want are leaders who can talk a good game on Peston.

Not really about spin,but since the advent of the TV age people do respond better to politicians that meet their expectations. Concise responses that answer the question, clear and fluent responses, apparent sincerity, charisma, humanity, leadership for example

Not all polititicans tick all the boxes Kinnock, Corbyn and Foot failed on different things but did not come across well on television. Similarly, IDS, Howard and May do not perform well on TV.

Blair, Gove, Clegg, Hesletine, Hammond and Cameron are all effective communicators on TV

To be fair, I do not think May is that bad a TV communicator but her talents are much more in the going than the talking about it. She does come across as a bit of a headmistress in my view.

Filo25

mrginge wrote: »

So after years of people complaining about politics being driven by spin and personality, it actually turns out that what we want are leaders who can talk a good game on Peston.

More representative of the fact that I've never seen May being particularly skilled at thinking on her feet and arguing a case, fortunately for her Corbyn is even worse at it.