Chelmsford Cancer Charity Quiz
Quizzes & Puzzles1 min ago
Pensioners
Another Manifesto pledge broken by the Tories .
How many pensioners will vote Tory at the next G/E now that they have suspended the triple lock system on their state pensions. Typical Tory Trick The rich get rich and the pensioners get poorer.
How many pensioners will vote Tory at the next G/E now that they have suspended the triple lock system on their state pensions. Typical Tory Trick The rich get rich and the pensioners get poorer.
Answers
Voting for the same Party regardless of how well they perform is just monumentally stupid. Even if you're a long-term Tory supporter, it should be obvious that you want a *competent* and capable Tory party. A good way to achieve that is to send them to opposition now and then, to make sure that they don't fall into complacency. As regards the triple lock, I'm...
08:34 Wed 19th Oct 2022
// I don’t think that's what cost Theresa May. I think her stance on Brexit that did that.//
At the times, she was saying "Brexit means Brexit", had called the election on the grounds that Parliament was blocking her efforts to deliver Brexit, and shortly after she'd signed legislation triggering Article 50. From 2017-19, I'm sure you can legitimately make a case that her stance on Brexit wasn't enough to appease Leave voters, but in 2017 it seems odd in the extreme to say that her "stance on Brexit" cost her the Election -- unless you mean that Remain voters didn't back her?
Because, as I say, we only had a 2017 Election in the first place because, in her view, she needed a bigger mandate to deliver Brexit.
At the times, she was saying "Brexit means Brexit", had called the election on the grounds that Parliament was blocking her efforts to deliver Brexit, and shortly after she'd signed legislation triggering Article 50. From 2017-19, I'm sure you can legitimately make a case that her stance on Brexit wasn't enough to appease Leave voters, but in 2017 it seems odd in the extreme to say that her "stance on Brexit" cost her the Election -- unless you mean that Remain voters didn't back her?
Because, as I say, we only had a 2017 Election in the first place because, in her view, she needed a bigger mandate to deliver Brexit.
Jim, I mean that when she said 'Brexit means Brexit' (did she say that?), that section of the electorate that voted for Brexit didn't believe her - and with good reason. I didn't believe her either because the only reason that she didn't have a bigger mandate for delivering Brexit was that Brexit was not what she was attempting to deliver.
Oh yeah, it's also worth pointing out that UKIP support collapsed in 2017. Job done, you could argue -- but it's generally clear that most of their votes went (at least net), to the Tories, eg https:/
If anything, it was the overly hard stance on Brexit that seems to have cost them votes to Labour. That didn't apply in 2019, of course. But I suppose I'm confused as to what your claim is: are you saying that the Tories lost their majority in 2017 because May wasn't sufficiently committed to Brexit? There's no evidence for that, and rather a lot more evidence pointing precisely the other way.
If anything, it was the overly hard stance on Brexit that seems to have cost them votes to Labour. That didn't apply in 2019, of course. But I suppose I'm confused as to what your claim is: are you saying that the Tories lost their majority in 2017 because May wasn't sufficiently committed to Brexit? There's no evidence for that, and rather a lot more evidence pointing precisely the other way.
It won't affect us that much, but living in an area where wages are very low and knowing lots of older people who worked hard for years in agriculture associated jobs with no company pensions, I realise that they need and deserve every penny of their state pension. So it is penalising the very people who need it. So many younger people think that pensioners must be rich in their own houses and company pensions. And its not so.
As for voting, I have only voted Conservative twice because there were no other options. At this time if there was a GE I wouldn't vote. I will never vote for Labour or probably any other parties. If the conservatives get their act together then they probably would get my vote again.
As for voting, I have only voted Conservative twice because there were no other options. At this time if there was a GE I wouldn't vote. I will never vote for Labour or probably any other parties. If the conservatives get their act together then they probably would get my vote again.
My last post came out before I'd had a chance to see yours. I think it replies to what you're saying anyhow: by most measures, The Tories had a huge amount of support from Leave voters, and only a small number of them seemed to go to Labour. Since there's anyway always been a "leftie Leaver" vote, it's hard to argue that the c. 25% of Leave voters who backed Labour would have switched to the Tories in any circumstances.
Still, the 2017 Election looks to have been rather tight, and Labour got most of the lucky breaks it seems (eg by winning nine of the ten seats which changed between Con and Lab with majorities less than 1000), so it possibly would not have taken *that* many extra Leave voters to have swung things the other way.
Still, the 2017 Election looks to have been rather tight, and Labour got most of the lucky breaks it seems (eg by winning nine of the ten seats which changed between Con and Lab with majorities less than 1000), so it possibly would not have taken *that* many extra Leave voters to have swung things the other way.
UKIP lost votes to the Tories because in a General Election the 'safe' vote is what people go for - that's why we have only two parties that ever have the vaguest hope of governing. UKIP supporters couldn’t be sure that others would vote in a like manner and rather than risk it and allow a Labour government to slide in sideways, their votes went where they thought they would be safest - to the Conservatives.
May wasn't committed to Brexit. She was a Remainer and given the opportunity would have kept at least one leg jammed in the door of the EU - and more if she could. That much was clear - which is why she couldn't get her ideas through parliament.
It didn't apply in 2019 because Boris promised Brexit and in doing so collected votes in places that would have been unthinkable previously. It doesn't take much to work it out.
May wasn't committed to Brexit. She was a Remainer and given the opportunity would have kept at least one leg jammed in the door of the EU - and more if she could. That much was clear - which is why she couldn't get her ideas through parliament.
It didn't apply in 2019 because Boris promised Brexit and in doing so collected votes in places that would have been unthinkable previously. It doesn't take much to work it out.
There are plenty of other factors explaining the 2019 result. For example, Corbyn was leader both times, but between the two elections voters had more chance to see what he was like, and evidently didn't like him much. So there's that factor. Or there's the point that Parliament as a whole had shown itself incapable of delivering Brexit, or anything else for that matter, and as a result got slaughtered in favour of Johnson's promise to honour the referendum.
The analysis that May suffered in 2017 for not promising Brexit works only in retrospect, not at the time. That's the point. In 2017 she got most of the support of Leave voters -- and I bet the rest probably regretted not backing her, in some sense, because the Hung Parliament emboldened Remainers to think they could stop Brexit.
So, no. There's no evidence that May lost in 2017 because she wasn't Brexit-y enough. That's a retcon.
The analysis that May suffered in 2017 for not promising Brexit works only in retrospect, not at the time. That's the point. In 2017 she got most of the support of Leave voters -- and I bet the rest probably regretted not backing her, in some sense, because the Hung Parliament emboldened Remainers to think they could stop Brexit.
So, no. There's no evidence that May lost in 2017 because she wasn't Brexit-y enough. That's a retcon.
Dave, in my opinion the State Pension should be raised to a reasonable amount for all who qualify - rich or poor- and pension credits should not exist. My basic state pension comes under old rules and is less than new pension scheme. I have additions because I paid into Serps etc. Those increments are discounted in any pension increases.
Also lots of the elderly are too embarrassed to empty for credits or have no-one who can help them do so.
Also lots of the elderly are too embarrassed to empty for credits or have no-one who can help them do so.
Jim, I've no idea what a retcon is, but however you want to dress it up - or down - there's no doubting May's dismal failure - or Boris's outstanding success - and to me the reason for both is clear. However, best to rein horns in before this goes any further. It's already moved too far away from the OP.
All you Tories still ignoring the question about the windfall tax on the oil and energy companies?
Still agree Truss was right not to implement it as the dire financial woes continue, one after another as inflation breaks 10%?
I feel sorry for the likes of 10ClarionSt, people with genuine fear and trepidation about the next 6 months are being ignored.
Look at the state of this country in 21st century Britain, where the rich get richer and ordinary folk are left literally out in the cold.
Shameful, let’s get a GE done ASAP after Truss goes shortly, the public are getting restless and really have had enough.
Still agree Truss was right not to implement it as the dire financial woes continue, one after another as inflation breaks 10%?
I feel sorry for the likes of 10ClarionSt, people with genuine fear and trepidation about the next 6 months are being ignored.
Look at the state of this country in 21st century Britain, where the rich get richer and ordinary folk are left literally out in the cold.
Shameful, let’s get a GE done ASAP after Truss goes shortly, the public are getting restless and really have had enough.
