How did the Conservatives win when everyone seems to hate them?

Scroll to see replies

classof2015

A few reasons. Firstly, the reason you find the election result being dissonant with vocal people on the internet is because it is young people who use the internet, it's not even slightly representative of peoples opinions on the whole.

Secondly, you have UKIP to thank. By this I mean that it seems that UKIP did a fantastic job of taking enough votes from labour so that the conservatives could win a good number of marginal seats.

Ukip mostly took votes from the conservatives though

(edited 8 years ago)

Reply 21

Iwouldliketoknow

Original post by TimmonaPortella

They're really not. They just don't want to deal with leftist whining.

I hope you don't think being leftist or using the word is pejorative :h:

Reply 22

MatureStudent36

Original post by classof2015

Ukip mostly took votes from the conservatives though

Not quite. They took some votes from the conservatives and some votes from labour.

the reason why labour supporters are so vocal about UKIP is that they are petrified that UKIP will eat into te traditional labour support base.

Reply 23

MatthewParis

There are three stories here;

(1) The SNP earthquake. Losing 41 seats in Scotland meant Labour had a mountain to climb before they even got into the fight

(2) The Lib Dem vote was unzipped right down the middle. The Tories and Labour picked the carcass clean, but this benefited the Tories more.

(3) Miliband simply could not win back the 3%-4% of former Labour supporters who voted for us under Blair but voted Conservative in 2010 and did so again in 2015

There was no massive movement towards the Conservatives, and Labour picked up seats from the Conservatives in real terms. But Labour's inability to woo those Con-Lab swing voters in English marginals meant that they simply could not win the seats they had to. There are two considerations here; one is that media campaigns of fear and smear, and personal abuse, work. Thoughtful conservatives like Peter Oborne and Fraser Nelson, and an almost characteristic Tory ex-boyfriend of mine (he's an Old Etonian like the PM, Oxford graduate, and an entrepreneur) really rated Miliband and thought highly of him; they saw him as a man of principle (the latter voted Labour, something he never thought he'd do). What the Tories offered was not principle, it was a hysterical campaign of fearmongering that was designed to dazzle and mislead the superficial and vulgar minds in the English lower-middle class.

But the other side of the coin is that there's no question Labour made a mistake in selecting Miliband as leader; he was never going to appeal in middle England. The message itself was not bad, but we were murdered on the SNP issue and the leadership issue. That's why I support Dan Jarvis for leader; let's see how it goes down to have a man who has never had a real job outside PR and politics (Cameron) attacking a former para (Dan Jarvis)

(edited 8 years ago)

Reply 24

classof2015

Most of the big name defects to ukip are conservative and they re a more right wing party.

Have a look
http://anotherangryvoice.blogspot.co.uk/2014/09/12-tory-ukip-defectors.html

Reply 25

Smug Life

Lefties are more vocal on social media, forums, etc.

Reply 26

hotliketea

i just see it as labour lost so there's a lot more bitterness from the lefties. if the tories had lost and labour had got in , you'd probably be seeing the opposite on social media at least (ik my Facebook is full of people saying MY LIFE IS RUINED FOR THE NEXT FIVE YEARS TELL ME IF YOU'RE A TORIE SO I CAN UNFOLLOW YOU etc etc)

i also think it's a lot more socially acceptable to defend a leftist position than a conservative position. it's certainly easier.

Reply 27

MatthewParis

Original post by hotliketea

i also think it's a lot more socially acceptable to defend a leftist position than a conservative position. it's certainly easier.

Nonsense. The bien pensant of the 2010s are Tory-inclined columnists who buy the fiction of Conservative economic competence, a completely unearned reputation given the Tories spend more than Labour in government

Reply 28

PPF

To be honest the Tories are much more likely to create long-term economic stability and prosperity. However, Labour may have induced a short-term boom and therefore improved my job prospects after graduation.

By the way, I don't understand the hostility towards Nigel Farage. I mean the guy is speaking in the interest of the British people yet they dislike him so much? For example, the issue of health tourism. All he is saying is that if someone would like to be treated in the UK they are very welcome to do so granted that their government pays for them to have that treatment done. It only makes sense..

(edited 8 years ago)

Reply 29

hotliketea

Original post by MatthewParis

that seems off the point i was making... i was referring to social acceptability , not specific policies.

it is true there may or may not be fictions regarding spending on both sides , but it is still easier to argue for labour than conservatives in a progressive society , especially if you follow the marxist view that a developing society is always heading towards communism

Reply 30

MatthewParis

Original post by hotliketea

that seems off the point i was making... i was referring to social acceptability , not specific policies.

That's what I'm talking about; it is more socially acceptable to rattle on about the Conservatives being "responsible" than it is to point out that the reverse is true.

it is still easier to argue for labour than conservatives in a progressive society , especially if you follow the marxist view that a developing society is always heading towards communism

I'm not sure how that's relevant to Labour given they are not Marxists, and Marxism is probably the least acceptable ideology, socially speaking (except for, perhaps, national socialism and fascism)

Reply 31

Ssskinz

Old folks don't use the internet remember?

Reply 32

MatthewParis

Original post by PPF

To be honest the Tories are much more likely to create long-term economic stability and prosperity

The evidence would suggest otherwise; we had absolute chaos under Thatcher and Major. We had 3 million unemployed under Thatcher, Black Wednesday under Major. Under Cameron we lost our AAA credit rating and borrowed more than all previous Labour governments combined.

The Tories spend more in government than Labour, and to the extent there was a crisis when Labour was in power, it was a global crisis. By contrast, the recessions and economic chaos under the Tories in the 1980s and 1990s was self-inflicted, as was the economic stagnation during the first three years of the coalition government

The fact that so many people believe the opposite is true merely demonstrates just how effective propaganda in the print media can be

Reply 33

Xin Xang

No one likes to show off their greed.

They keep their dark selfish thoughts locked away. Waiting for that moment of privacy in a voting booth, where they can then sign away the misery of the most vulnerable.

Its easy to hurt others when they're looking away.

Reply 34

rmcrr

Original post by MatureStudent36

Working people don't really have time to post on comments threads so you don't get to read the comments on the majority of people.

It's like hanging around with a group of fanatic animal rights activists. Hang around with them long enough and you think their beliefs are societies normality.

It is a shame there are no parties focusing on the well being of the working class people who earn just over the amount to be classed as ineligible to claim benefits, but don't earn enough so that when they pay taxes, they are worse off than those on benefits.

Another thing I would like to point out is that there are thousands of people on benefits who cheat the system so that they are left better off without any effort put in. These system cheaters are normally the people on benefits you'd find with SKY TV in their homes, or the latest apple products. Those are luxuries, not essentials. The government should start an investigation into those on benefits to see who is cheating the system, and if they are then they should have their benefits reduced. This would create new jobs for investigators, it would make it so that the tax payers money can either be put somewhere useful or it should reduce the overall pay from the tax payer.

I understand this comment will leave some controversy, and I am willing to accept the hate.

(edited 8 years ago)

Reply 35

Cryptographic

Original post by randomguy94

I always read on the Daily Mail comments section and various other places on the internet, hate comments to David Cameron and people saying how much they hate the Tories and everything like that. Everyone seemed to be confident that David Cameron would lose the election.

So how did he win? I don't understand.

Because it's trendy to hate them, or at least to pretend to. However when you get into the ballot box a lot of people will vote Tory but say that they voted Lab/LD/UKIP. It's called the shy Tory factor.

Posted from TSR Mobile

Reply 36

PPF

Original post by MatthewParis

When Cameron came into office the recession wasn't over. To borrow isn't necessarily bad. In fact borrowing can be good. It enables you to inter-temporally smooth consumption. At the time of the crisis private-debt levels were extremely high and therefore private sector deleveraging meant that the government had to spend. If it didn't we would probably have been in a depression at the moment...

Reply 37

TheDefiniteArticle

To a significant extent, what you see people disagreeing with will depend on what you follow on social media. If you look at a Guardian article, the people who are getting angry are those who are right-of-centre, and on a Telegraph article, those getting angry will be left-of-centre.

Actually, I guess it's kind of true that the left tend to be more self-righteous as they base a lot of their position on (perceived) morals rather than economics. It's very tough to argue that high progressive taxes and a large welfare state maximise GDP, but it is quite easy to argue that they maximise social utility.