Ho ho ho! Merry Election 2019?

[smalex]

Personally it could have been the Gerbils Running The Country party who wanted to introduce all manner of amazing kind policies and with Johnson in charge I wouldn't have voted for them. Which makes me wonder in turn if I am blinkered by my loathing of the man.

I think its entirely reasonable to be 'blinkered' by the person presenting the policies to you. Known facts about johnson include being sacked for lying twice, cheating on his wife, fathering an undetermined number of children while married, displaying sexist, racist and homophobic opinions on many occasions, breaking promises in the most blatant ways. And that's before you start scrutinising his voting record, or how he behaved during the referendum (or since).
It would be naive in the extreme to ignore that and just base it on the policies he put forward.

[Lily]

Indeed... But then people could say dreadful things about Corbyn too. I don't swallow the "terrorist empathiser" nonsense, but I have a huge problem with what appears to be at best a tolerance of anti-semitism having read so much about it both on here and elsewhere, trying to figure out what's genuinely going on. I don't know if I could have voted that in. But then I couldn't have voted in Johnson either.

Ken, I'm not going to argue years ago politics with you. I offered an alternative reason why someone might vote in a way you disagree with. You don't agree with that, fine, but you're not actually considering why that choice was made, just disagreeing with it. Which means we've come full circle really.

[smalex]

I really struggled with the negative aspects of Corbyn too, but for me, they paled in comparison to the gross failings of Johnson. But my general point is the same- it's naive just to take the policies on face value and not tie them with the person presenting them to you (especially when he's relied so heavily on being a 'personality') and the historic track record of the party and person involved. So I don't blame you for feeling 'blinkered' against Johnson- there is quite literally nothing he could say or do to change my mind about him.

[indigo]

In the simplest terms, I just do not understand why anyone would vote Conservative and I would like to know their reasons.

[Lily]

I was thinking about this and why voting for the party not the man made sense for Labourites. I came up with that I trusted the rest of Labour more than I trusted the rest of the Conservatives, ie I can understand people voting for Corbyn even if they didn't trust him.

I don't feel that way about the Tories and am surprised anyone did but I know people did and from what I've gathered they thought they would provide some stability which the country needs. A couple said it was the hardest decision they've had to make.

I wonder if it's because Rees-Mogg, Johnson et al are almost cartoon characters? They're funny so they must be harmless. They have fun and are entertaining. Labour are very dry in comparison. (Not my views btw!)

[Chicky]

I’ve just rejoined the Labour Party to try and stop Rebecca Long-Bailey getting elected. It’s not much but I feel like I have to do something.

[smalex]

I was thinking about this and why voting for the party not the man made sense for Labourites. I came up with that I trusted the rest of Labour more than I trusted the rest of the Conservatives, ie I can understand people voting for Corbyn even if they didn't trust him.

I don't feel that way about the Tories and am surprised anyone did but I know people did and from what I've gathered they thought they would provide some stability which the country needs. A couple said it was the hardest decision they've had to make.

I wonder if it's because Rees-Mogg, Johnson et al are almost cartoon characters? They're funny so they must be harmless. They have fun and are entertaining. Labour are very dry in comparison. (Not my views btw!)

My god, a bout of e-coli is funnier than JRM. I get the Johnson cartoon buffoon thing, I probably fell for that myself when he used to appear on HIGNFY way back when (although even then, remember saying to my dad 'And he's an actual MP?' because I was bemused people would vote for him.

I'd have thought the relentless news about child poverty, food bank use, etc would kill any humour stone dead anyway, but I guess you've got to be willing to listen to that and a weigh it up against what you want to be true.

I suppose when I think about it the 'best' justification for voting Tory this time is that it seems like the quickest way to resolve the Brexit issue. It isn't any quick way to anything, in reality (even the vaguest bit of insight into what needs to happen next would reveal that), but I can see that backing a second referendum or unilateral revoke, or aiming for a hung parliament could seem like a step backwards into more uncertainty.

ETA: I think people are convinced by JRM because he's an incredibly posh man and that = a high IQ in people's minds.

[Morganna]

I think that there is a fairly widespread belief that child poverty is a result of people having children in order to claim benefits, and because parents insist on having mobile phones.

I am in a lot of local history groups populated by really old people who honestly think that poverty doesn’t exist now because you don’t see kids playing outside without shoes. ‘They don’t know they’re born’ is a constant refrain, along with moaning about ‘health and safety’ stopping urchins from playing on bomb sites or roaming the streets unsupervised. ‘We had imagination, not like kids today.’

If people don’t see it, or accept that poverty is real, I suppose they won’t vote against it. Maybe shutting down Channel 5 for a while would be a start.

[smalex]

Yes, I agree. I deleted someone last week (who is very leave/tory supporting) because she shared that thing that claimed the kid on the pile of coats in a hospital was a set up by the mum. A quick google would have shown that the hospital themselves verified it did happen.
I'd have far more respect for someone voting Conservative if they said 'Ok, the poor kid, that shouldn't have happened, but the party I support are proposing X Y & Z to combat it happening again) but so many people just want to believe it's fake because it suits their narrative and means they don't need to scrutinise their own choices.

[sally maclennane]

The buffoon/comedy thing just baffles me, I cant understand why people.would be taken in by that.

I think it's a shame if there are people here who are Conservative voters and feel got at, but I would be genuinely interested to hear why they have chosen to vote that way, and so far, they haven't done that. It's just been complaints about feeling got at

[Lily]

Heh. I used to like Johnson, too. But not when he had any power.

I suppose when I think about it the 'best' justification for voting Tory this time is that it seems like the quickest way to resolve the Brexit issue. It isn't any quick way to anything, in reality (even the vaguest bit of insight into what needs to happen next would reveal that), but I can see that backing a second referendum or unilateral revoke, or aiming for a hung parliament could seem like a step backwards into more uncertainty.

ETA: I think people are convinced by JRM because he's an incredibly posh man and that = a high IQ in people's minds.

Yes, I agree with all this. I think people tend to trust rich people because they think "Well maybe I could be rich too if I follow them". Or something. They admire wealth, for all that apparently everyone in Labour is wealthy too (I have no idea if they are or not).

The Brexit thing is the thing that swung it, IM uninformed O. But yes, it's up to people to say why they voted as they did, if they wish to - I'm just surmising, rightly or wrongly.

I think Morgs has a good point too. Poverty only exists because you don't pull up your own bootstraps, or whatever it is.

[sally maclennane]

I think Morgs has a good point too. Poverty only exists because you don't pull up your own bootstraps, or whatever it is.

Its the concept of relative poverty, I guess. Sure there's very few kids running around barefoot but there is so much information about food bank use that to me, it can only be wilful ignorance. It's that thing of people imagining that poverty is due to one's own recklessness, and that if they were poor, they'd be somehow better at being poor than the actual poor. They wouldn't waste money on mobile phones, or big tellies

[Livilla]

What do you class "calling names"? I don't see expressing an opinion that Tory voters tend to be ill informed and often primarily motivated by self interest as name calling.

A good touchstone is often whether you would be annoyed if those terms were applied to you. Which, for most people, I suspect they would be. Which immediately, as others have said, means you've missed your chance to get them to listen to you and perhaps change their views. Anger used to belittle people who think differently to you, no matter how justified, is such an own goal as a political tool. Compare Trump to Obama, pretty much anyone to Nelson Mandela etc.

I used to work with a guy who actually stood against Jeremy Corbyn in Islington as a Tory. Wheelchair-bound, suffering a degenerative medical condition, he was utterly reliant on the NHS and facing a future dependent on the disability benefit when he was no longer able to work. While he could, he chose to work in consumer protection because he cared desperately about making life better for people. And, strangely you might think, he was such a passionate Tory that he wanted to be and MP. I respect him hugely, and if I had lived in Islington, I would have been strongly tempted to vote for him over Corbyn, despite the fact I've never voted Tory in my life. People are complex creatures, and rarely does reductive politics help us understand each other.

[Lily]

I know it's an cliche but I think social media has so much to blame in all this. The spreading of utter bollocks. Yesterday there was a guy talking about 'violent post-election Labour protests' on a friend's feed and when I asked where this had happened he showed me a Breitbart article. So I asked him for actual evidence and he posted a Guardian link. To a story from September in which pro-Brexit marchers were violent towards anti-Brexit marchers. When I pointed this out, he just made a joke about something else. How many people will have believed the rubbish he spouted and spread it?

[Livilla]

Its the concept of relative poverty, I guess. Sure there's very few kids running around barefoot but there is so much information about food bank use that to me, it can only be wilful ignorance. It's that thing of people imagining that poverty is due to one's own recklessness, and that if they were poor, they'd be somehow better at being poor than the actual poor. They wouldn't waste money on mobile phones, or big tellies

"If I were in that situation I would grow my own vegetables/make my own fun with a cardboard box/find a job immediately/better myself instantly/never be ground down by the sheer pointlessness and interminable misery of my daily existence'/ignore the Fire Service advice and leave Grenfell Tower straight away" etc etc - it's very easy to believe the lines when you have never lived the reality. And the lines never really get challenged unless, like the last one, they are so obviously bullshit that they can't be accepted.

[ParisGal]

I watched a program about 1979 the other day, and how people had voted Conservative after years of strikes, and austerity imposed on the UK (I've not been able to find quite why in a short period of googling) and a huge loan from the IMF in '76. The Cons. campaign was a similar disconnect from their actual actions and values.

[Livilla]

I know it's an cliche but I think social media has so much to blame in all this.

And I'm back on my own personal soapbox here, but it's not just the social media, it's the press controlled by people like the Barclay Brothers and Rupert Murdoch who do so much damage and just sit there, insulated by their millions. Mega-rich white men and their agendas for world domination make me so furious.

[Mountain Goat]

I've said this a lot, so sorry for being dull, but this whole Brexit process really took my blinkers off regarding some of my previous broad brush assumptions about Tories. There are plenty (mainly now ex Tory MPs) who I may disagree with, but see as decent, honourable people who I have a lot of time for. The issue with this election is that the Tory party that was on offer was not like this, and I struggle to see how a die-hard Conservative could comfortably vote for this particular government, which have ripped up Conservative values and replaced them with far right politics. I assume that many will have held their noses and voted in the same way I held my nose to vote Labour, but I haven't heard much about this, only partisan nonsense about how marvellous they are. If we could all have am honest discussion (and I am talking about in the media/social media, not pressurising people on here) about what the hell has gone wrong across the board maybe we might start to get somewhere.

Emotions have run high, and I apologise for anything offensive or personal I might have said (I honestly don't remember, but it's quite likely). I do however think that we are in a very extreme situation, and that emotions and anger should be riding high, and to quash those and discuss nicely possibly is a problem in itself, as it understates the huge and very real issues that are being caused by austerity, makes it all seem safe and theoretical and distant. We should be feeling this viscerally, regardless of our opinions on how to resolve it; I think that some of the problems are about (as comes up above) some people being too far removed from the grinding poverty others are going through to be able to process or accept it. But we shouldn't be creating dynamics where people can't express themselves.

[smalex]

I suppose it depends if you see here primarily as an outlet to discuss things (things which are incredibly concerning to most of us) with generally like minded friends, or as an opportunity to try and engage with and understand/influence the mindset of people with differing opinions. I suspect most of us by default would feel the first. So sure, I completely accept this thread (and similar other ones) haven't been the greatest example of a spirit of understanding and empathy and I doubt that most people would speak in quite the same manner if they were in a wider circle of people articulating opposing views. If people had posted more frequently to express contrasting views I suspect the tone of the whole thread would be somewhat different. In the absence of that, it's become an outlet for venting fears and angers and disillusionment.
I think actually the thread is littered with people trying to make sense of why people they know voted as they did (lots of people citing parents etc), and as someone who did put their head over the parapet to explain why I voted that way in 2010, I felt the responses I got were very measured. If anyone thought I was a idiot/selfish they certainly were good enough to keep it to themselves . I'm quite sure no one thought I'd done the right thing, I didn't change anyone's minds (although I didn't post trying to), but I think there was a spirit of understanding about it. From my very honest opinion.

[smalex]

Yes, I agree very much Goat.