A Question for Tory Supporters

Theophile

Matt_L wrote: »

Thats actually a very accurate portrayal of what happened, refreshing....

A perfect example is john, a member here that calls anyone that doesn't support Corbyn, stupid, think and clueless...

maybe john has a point

Matt_L

Theophile wrote: »

maybe john has a point

Obviously there are many that believe he has a very good point and take his stance, hence why the Labour will never be elected under its current form...

Malthusian

HRH_MUngo wrote: »

The insults and name-calling emanate in the vast majority from people who say they support a 'kinder politics'.

It's called "being able to dish it out but not take it". All bullies are the same. None of them have grown one inch since they were 10 and terrorising the primary school playground.

jimi_man wrote: »

Can you show your workings on this one please? As far as I can see the Conservatives didn't support another referendum - 43.6%, neither did the Brexit party - 2% and the primary position of the Liberal Democrats was not to support another referendum but to revoke Article 50 - 11.6% = 57.2%. Irrespective of anyone else, that means that there cannot be any more than 42.8% who did support another referendum?

This rewriting of reality is doing the round on a lot of left-wing outlets (including the Grauniad). Nigel made a boo-boo by referring to it as votes supporting another referendum; as you point out, Lib Dems were explicitly against. He should have said that 51.5% of voters supported Remain. It is still wrong but less obviously wrong.

A similar specious calculation went around after the European elections in an attempt to say "Remain won". In both cases it relies on counting Labour votes as "Remain" despite Labour being explicitly a Leave party, a position confirmed when Labour members elected Corbyn, arch-Leaver and opponent of the "capitalist club", as leader both before and after the referendum.

Most of Labour's flagship manifesto policies relied on the inevitable Leave victory in a second referendum, due to EU rules on state aid and sex discrimination (which would have scuppered the WASPI bung if the UK didn't leave).

Herzlos

Malthusian wrote: »

This rewriting of reality is doing the round on a lot of left-wing outlets (including the Grauniad). Nigel made a boo-boo by referring to it as votes supporting another referendum; as you point out, Lib Dems were explicitly against. He should have said that 51.5% of voters supported Remain. It is still wrong but less obviously wrong.

A similar specious calculation went around after the European elections in an attempt to say "Remain won". In both cases it relies on counting Labour votes as "Remain" despite Labour being explicitly a Leave party, a position confirmed when Labour members elected Corbyn, arch-Leaver and opponent of the "capitalist club", as leader both before and after the referendum.

All of this interpretation of proxy referendums is a waste of time and just highlights how much better it'd be to just run another referendum. The only reason it won't happen is the Leavers fear they'll lose.

Fran_Klee

Theophile wrote: »

maybe john has a point

If you're going to be picky about grammar it would help you no end if you did better yourself, maybe starting with when to use capital letters and full stops.

It seems that some people also haven't learned that calling people stupid, thick and clueless is counterproductive.

MaxiRobriguez

Matt_L wrote: »

Thats actually a very accurate portrayal of what happened, refreshing....

A perfect example is john, a member here that calls anyone that doesn't support Corbyn, stupid, think and clueless...

As a Labour voter, it's hard to disagree with that.

What I would say however is that I've seen lots of analysis about this, but very limited, in fact nothing at all, about the reasons FOR voting for the Conservatives.

Labour had a disastrous election but those voters can be won back. The Tories are not infallible, they are also weak, and will have a very difficult five years to govern over what with the complexities of Brexit and the very likelihood of Scotland and Norther Ireland !!!!!!ing off.

Herzlos

Pete_Zaluver wrote: »

That's really funny when in effect leavers have won twice.

1. There's only been 1 referendum and you won that (just)
2. We've all lost, but some of us don't realise it yet.

Thrugelmir

MaxiRobriguez wrote: »

What I would say however is that I've seen lots of analysis about this, but very limited, in fact nothing at all, about the reasons FOR voting for the Conservatives.

Perhaps keeping the message simple was the key. Little point in making long term committments when there's much short term uncertainty to be resolved.

coastline

I'm not sure how employment rights were highlighted in the Labour manifesto but I seem to remember them going for more secure job positions. It doesn't seem to be the case in this article as they are potentially making redundancies.
Basically if funds are short then you have to tighten up somewhere but the Tory party have been accused of painful austerity for the last 10 years by the opposition.

https://www.politicshome.com/news/uk/political-parties/labour-party/news/108287/labour-party-staff-told-they-will-be-out-work-end

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/dec/18/labour-party-staff-angry-at-handling-of-possible-redundancies

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-50842915

Thrugelmir

coastline wrote: »

I'm not sure how employment rights were highlighted in the Labour manifesto but I seem to remember them going for more secure job positions. It doesn't seem to be the case in this article as they are potentially making redundancies.

Club members get looked after well.