Question to Tory voting U.K members: If there was a G.E tomorrow, would you still vote Tory?

a reply to: uncommitted

Okay, so your bias out trumps my bias? You're more about business and how it effects you personally? Of course, I can only assume this as you have not mentioned the people who have been targeted in this last budget.

And before you start with the doing it again claim, you were the one to mention bias. I had not mentioned it previously, but I appreciate it is your go to phrase whenever we discuss politics.

I haven't voted for Labour since the 2001 election, because I didn't support their illegal invasion of Iraq. I have voted independent candidates since.

I must admit the more I hear from Corbyn, the more I like him. The more I hear from Osborne, the more I dislike him.

It's all about bias I guess.

originally posted by: Cobaltic1978
a reply to: uncommitted

Okay, so your bias out trumps my bias? You're more about business and how it effects you personally? Of course, I can only assume this as you have not mentioned the people who have been targeted in this last budget.

And before you start with the doing it again claim, you were the one to mention bias. I had not mentioned it previously, but I appreciate it is your go to phrase whenever we discuss politics.

I haven't voted for Labour since the 2001 election, because I didn't support their illegal invasion of Iraq. I have voted independent candidates since.

I must admit the more I hear from Corbyn, the more I like him. The more I hear from Osborne, the more I dislike him.

It's all about bias I guess.

Of course I talk from my own circumstances, you asked would people vote Tory and I gave my reasons why. If you call that bias then I think you are slightly blinkered. I'm pro business because that is what generates revenue for the UK - if you don't understand that then that's your choice.

When you say 'targeted', what do you mean? Are you talking about disability benefit? If so, my personal opinion is that reasonable means testing is not unreasonable. If people are not in a position to perform any work due to disability (mentally or physically) then they should get the full benefit that is possible, if their disability excludes them from some work but not from other work, then every effort should be made to ensure training is available if required.

If you really like Corbyn more the more you hear from him, it'd be interesting to know your age. He's pushing almost to the letter what led Michael Foot to become unelectable - and Corbyn was around even then. I called him a throwback but I guess he's not, he's the dinosaur that didn't know how to evolve.

a reply to: uncommitted

But it's not means testing it's an wholesale cut to the personal independent payment aka PIP.

I am all for people being able to work in any capacity they are able to, and this payment is actually paid to people who are in work but need additional support financially, in order to make any reasonable adjustments for them to be able to do so.

This isn't about forcing people into the workplace, this is about reducing the amount of money the government is willing to pay.

Whilst I can appreciate the need to attract commerce into the country for the sakes of the country's economy, they also have a responsibility to contribute fairly through the taxation system in order to pay for things like the infrastructure, the free health care, to support those who can't work.

Oh and for the record I am aged 45.

originally posted by: Cobaltic1978
a reply to: uncommitted

But it's not means testing it's an wholesale cut to the personal independent payment aka PIP.

I am all for people being able to work in any capacity they are able to, and this payment is actually paid to people who are in work but need additional support financially, in order to make any reasonable adjustments for them to be able to do so.

This isn't about forcing people into the workplace, this is about reducing the amount of money the government is willing to pay.

Whilst I can appreciate the need to attract commerce into the country for the sakes of the country's economy, they also have a responsibility to contribute fairly through the taxation system in order to pay for things like the infrastructure, the free health care, to support those who can't work.

Oh and for the record I am aged 45.

Thank you for a really good response. As for the PIP, I'm not in a position to say what the appropriate payment should be but I'm open to all views on the subject rather than ones that are clearly signposted with their own agenda - and remember, it's not what the government is willing to pay, ultimately it's what can be paid, as is the case for any spending need.

You asked in the OP if people would still vote Tory, but that brings about an argument that can't be escaped - what party has credibly shown it would do things differently and better. Without that the question is flawed IMHO - sorry.

a reply to: uncommitted

Of course there are choices to be made, but this Government have sold us a pup.

The choice is to continue to support those that genuinely need it, the very people Osborne and co despise, or invest in projects that are going to make their friends an awful lot of money. Of course they choose the latter in the name of austerity.

In my opinion, It's an ideology more than a necessity and I truly believe they duped an awful lot of people in the run up to the last General Election. Well that and the fact Labour had a weak leader at the helm.

With regards to the question, it was aimed at those voters who sway from party to party at different elections. The very people that make or break Governments.

I seen a poll today that has Labour ahead of the Conservatives for the first time since Corbyn became leader. If anything that answers my question more than this thread does.

Of course things will change over the next 4 years, but if a black hole appears in a future budget forecast, we can guess what/where they will target to fill it. They are becoming experts at it.

a reply to: uncommitted

Ahem, Mr Duncan Smith agrees with me.

Who would have thunk it?

Lol, I understand your stance though, defending the indefensible.

originally posted by: Cobaltic1978
a reply to: uncommitted

Ahem, Mr Duncan Smith agrees with me.

Who would have thunk it?

Lol, I understand your stance though, dfending the indefensible.

You could not have timed this thread better if you tried.

Unless you knew something we all did not....

a reply to: nonspecific

No my friend, I read this one.

I trusted my fellow Brits on this one.

They have definitely not disappointed.

originally posted by: Cobaltic1978
a reply to: nonspecific

No my friend, I read this one.

I trusted my fellow Brits on this one.

They have definitely not disappointed.

It was a compliment as opposed to an insinuation of luck.

a reply to: nonspecific

I was being ironic, come on, I thought you would see that?

If you look, I almost made half of a Christmas tree.

originally posted by: Cobaltic1978
a reply to: uncommitted

Ahem, Mr Duncan Smith agrees with me.

Who would have thunk it?

Lol, I understand your stance though, defending the indefensible.

lol, I knew you'd have posted that, in fact logged in just to look. As it is, I think IDS is being disingenuous, I notice he's not resigning for people moving out of income tax instead of spending more on the disabled (slightly but not completely tongue in cheek).

Still don't see any other viable alternative party I would trust though so the answer still remains the same.

I doubt I'd ever vote Tory, but I'd like to see Dan Jarvis as the labour leader. Corbyns a little unelectable to the masses out there. I'm sure they would prefer an ex paratrooper to an ex Marxist, but Corbyn was the only decent option in the labour leadership debate. I like Corbyn, but he has no mass appeal in the uk.

originally posted by: woodwardjnr
I doubt I'd ever vote Tory, but I'd like to see Dan Jarvis as the labour leader. Corbyns a little unelectable to the masses out there. I'm sure they would prefer an ex paratrooper to an ex Marxist, but Corbyn was the only decent option in the labour leadership debate. I like Corbyn, but he has no mass appeal in the uk.

If Chuka Ummana had stayed in the leadership race and won it I would have thought Labour were in a position to be progressive, not regressive. Sadly he decided it wasn't for him.

a reply to: uncommitted yeah but the other candidates standing, were unimpressive. At least Corbyn had the popular vote and seemed to offer a little bit different from the Blair brown and Miliband old guard. He has also appealed to the idealistic youth vote

originally posted by: uncommitted

originally posted by: Cobaltic1978
a reply to: uncommitted

Ahem, Mr Duncan Smith agrees with me.

Who would have thunk it?

Lol, I understand your stance though, defending the indefensible.

lol, I knew you'd have posted that, in fact logged in just to look. As it is, I think IDS is being disingenuous, I notice he's not resigning for people moving out of income tax instead of spending more on the disabled (slightly but not completely tongue in cheek).

Still don't see any other viable alternative party I would trust though so the answer still remains the same.

I know, and if that's the way you feel, then who am I to argue with that?

I'm sure there are many things we would agree about in life, but Politics certainly isn't one of them.

originally posted by: Cobaltic1978

originally posted by: uncommitted

originally posted by: Cobaltic1978
a reply to: uncommitted

Ahem, Mr Duncan Smith agrees with me.

Who would have thunk it?

Lol, I understand your stance though, defending the indefensible.

lol, I knew you'd have posted that, in fact logged in just to look. As it is, I think IDS is being disingenuous, I notice he's not resigning for people moving out of income tax instead of spending more on the disabled (slightly but not completely tongue in cheek).

Still don't see any other viable alternative party I would trust though so the answer still remains the same.

I know, and if that's the way you feel, then who am I to argue with that?

I'm sure there are many things we would agree about in life, but Politics certainly isn't one of them.

I think you and I would agree on a lot of things, even in politics. I made my feelings clear in earlier posts that I think disability benefit should ensure those that need it get everything they need, no issue there, but at the same time I'm a little uncomfortable with IDS (who as it happens I admire a lot) and his real motives considering the EU referendum. There we go. Your question in the OP was would someone vote Tory which begs the question if not then who? I can't with an open heart bear to see Corbyn getting a chance to try and turn the clock back over 30 years and there is no other party I would consider credible or relevant.