How will you vote on Thursday?

[Sampson]

36 minutes ago, Benguin said:

Reform vote is interesting - Typically this forum has been a fair bit more left wing than the general public, so if Reform are getting 20% on here I’d anticipate more like 30% in the real world. Although popular vote doesn’t equate to seats, i think they will become the third biggest party this election. If conservatives voters cut their losses and vote reform on Thursday they might even eclipse the tories. I don’t necessarily like Reform but I’d prefer Farage as the leader of the opposition to Rishi

All the polls suggest Reform vote will be comfortably less than 20% and will be less then the Tories. There’s no way it will be close to 30%.

 

No poll has predicted they’ll get more than 7 seats yet either. Lib Dem’s and SNP will have many times more seats than them. Reform will likely be the 5th-7th biggest party in terms of seats depending on the Greens, local Welsh and N. Irish parties 

Edited 2 July by Sampson

[worth_the_wait]

3 hours ago, Sampson said:

Apart from the Conservatives it seems fairly representative, but the Conservative vote has also completely collapsed amongst the under 65s and I’d imagine the demographics here are more skewed with a less proportionate amount of older 65s

Sorry, but that did make me smile.      Apart from the party that polled 44% of the votes at the last general election .... 

 

It reminded me of  "Apart from the sanitation, the medicine, education, wine, public order, irrigation, roads, the fresh water system, and public health ... "

 

(fwiw, their vote will be well down on 2019, but I don't think it will collapse quite as much as some people are expecting.)

[Livid]

I will be voting Labour primarily as i'm desperate to get the Tories out and secondly as i'm a party member.

 

I'm socially liberal but on the economy i'm conservative with a very very small C.

 

There are certain aspects of the Labour party and Keir Starmer's leadership that worry me.

 

Maybe it's because i'm approaching my golden years but there seems to be little regard to the issue of Social Care in their manifesto, it's a timebomb they just appear to be ignoring. From a party that brought about the NHS and Welfare State they should be aiming higher.

 

There was an interview the other day where Starmer was asked if there were any plans to drop the percentage of a pension that could be taken tax free and he totally fluffed his answer, they later put out a press release saying there were no "planned" changes. A lot of things aren't planned, not exactly convincing. 

 

They appear to be very anti rejoining the EU, and I get we can't be flip flopping every decade, but there only reasoning seems to be "Well we had a vote", well we had a vote to elect the current bunch of clowns five years ago,  on that basis maybe we should just stick with them.  They seem to have adopted the "Stop the boats" mantra in their manifesto just to try and avoid losing votes to Reform and to me that feels off.

 

I've a feeling I won't be a member of the party when the next election rolls around but they've got 5 years to convince me they are up to the job. I'm no Corbanista but i'm not happy with them being Torylite either. 

 

 

 

 

[Sampson]

1 hour ago, worth_the_wait said:

Sorry, but that did make me smile.      Apart from the party that polled 44% of the votes at the last general election .... 

 

It reminded me of  "Apart from the sanitation, the medicine, education, wine, public order, irrigation, roads, the fresh water system, and public health ... "

 

(fwiw, their vote will be well down on 2019, but I don't think it will collapse quite as much as some people are expecting.)

Huh? I’m talking about representation of 2024 nor 2019, people have been saying “it won’t be as bad as predicted” for months bur the polls consistently show the Tories getting ridiculously small vote shares and that below the under 65 age brackets, people voteshare towards Tory is barely into double digits. It isn’t budging.
 

People need to realise traditional voting patterns and traditional adages about how the country vote and the “silent minority of Tory voters” no longer apply. The political landscape has changed since 2016

Edited 2 July by Sampson

[Guest Col city fan]

5 minutes ago, Livid said:

I will be voting Labour primarily as i'm desperate to get the Tories out and secondly as i'm a party member.

 

I'm socially liberal but on the economy i'm conservative with a very very small C.

 

There are certain aspects of the Labour party and Keir Starmer's leadership that worry me.

 

Maybe it's because i'm approaching my golden years but there seems to be little regard to the issue of Social Care in their manifesto, it's a timebomb they just appear to be ignoring. From a party that brought about the NHS and Welfare State they should be aiming higher.

 

There was an interview the other day where Starmer was asked if there were any plans to drop the percentage of a pension that could be taken tax free and he totally fluffed his answer, they later put out a press release saying there were no "planned" changes. A lot of things aren't planned, not exactly convincing. 

 

They appear to be very anti rejoining the EU, and I get we can't be flip flopping every decade, but there only reasoning seems to be "Well we had a vote", well we had a vote to elect the current bunch of clowns five years ago,  on that basis maybe we should just stick with them.  They seem to have adopted the "Stop the boats" mantra in their manifesto just to try and avoid losing votes to Reform and to me that feels off.

 

I've a feeling I won't be a member of the party when the next election rolls around but they've got 5 years to convince me they are up to the job. I'm no Corbanista but i'm not happy with them being Torylite either. 

 

 

 

 

One of my fave posts on this thread because I see it as honest and balanced. There’s no agenda, it’s just you saying what you think.

The reality for me is I just can’t fathom much of a difference between the two major political parties now. Neither in ideology, nor policy. Again, not providing me with much to ‘work with’ going forward.

Labour will get elected and I’m guessing the redistribution of resources will kick-in at some point and then we’ll see.

I think people ultimately vote (if being honest) for what will benefit ‘them and theirs’, mostly. I don’t want to pay any more tax, but I don’t want the NHS to become privatised. I don’t want to rejoin the EU, but I don’t want to leave the ECHR. It’s all checks and balances I guess.

 

[South Shire Fox]

Anyone who will make it possible to get a Drs appointment the same day i ring up, not have to wait 2 years for an operation, resurface the roads and improve public transport to levels other Countries in Europe receive. Id rather pay more in tax but have a higher quality society  

[StanSP]

8 minutes ago, South Shire Fox said:

Id rather pay more in tax but have a higher quality society  

This. 

[Daggers]

1 hour ago, Babylon said:

Who are they controlling on here 

They don’t need to, only the mindless want to vote for a calamitous Truss budget on steroids…

 

 

[Guest Col city fan]

33 minutes ago, StanSP said:

This. 

So if I said to you I’ll be taking 150 quid off you at source to spend on a ‘higher quality society’, define it? What do you mean?

[StanSP]

20 minutes ago, Col city fan said:

So if I said to you I’ll be taking 150 quid off you at source to spend on a ‘higher quality society’, define it? What do you mean?

What do you think it means? 

 

Our taxes would/should be going towards improving public services, right? At least a portion to begin with. 

 

Better NHS services, mental health resources, social care, public transport, infrastructure, council services, school and education services, emergency services, policing, welfare costs. 

 

Dare I say pretty much anything that the current government has cut resources on...? 

 

Surely having all those bettered than where they are now contributes to a 'higher quality society'? 

[Foxin_Mad]

6 minutes ago, StanSP said:

What do you think it means? 

 

Our taxes would/should be going towards improving public services, right? At least a portion to begin with. 

 

Better NHS services, mental health resources, social care, public transport, infrastructure, council services, school and education services, emergency services, policing, welfare costs. 

 

Dare I say pretty much anything that the current government has cut resources on...? 

 

Surely having all those bettered than where they are now contributes to a 'higher quality society'? 

Whilst I agree to a point you have to be careful with the mantra that more money means better service which it doesn't.

 

I actually agree id pay more tax if I felt it would improve many things in this country that currently fail us all. I also support Nationalising things where it being in private ownership offer zero benefit, for example water. The regulators of the private sector need to grow some balls and ask questions, like why is the UK paying more for gas than Europe even though we produce more gas. 

 

Alongside better funding we probably also need full reform and better management of the full civil service (which many wont like), some services are operating in a vastly different world to when they were formed. A national care service is necessary which would support many of the other areas, police, schools, hospitals etc which are currently doing social care they should not be doing. We also need to be sure we are supporting homeless people and people with addictions properly, to try and break the cycle.  

[Guest Col city fan]

18 minutes ago, StanSP said:

What do you think it means? 

 

Our taxes would/should be going towards improving public services, right? At least a portion to begin with. 

 

Better NHS services, mental health resources, social care, public transport, infrastructure, council services, school and education services, emergency services, policing, welfare costs. 

 

Dare I say pretty much anything that the current government has cut resources on...? 

 

Surely having all those bettered than where they are now contributes to a 'higher quality society'? 

I don’t know your age Stan, and you always seem to be a pleasant young man, although again a little passive-aggressive imo.

But having conversations with you like this,  makes me think you come across as a typical leftie student-type who believes that the world should be a totally equal place and that the moon is made of cheese etc.

One thing I’ve tried to explain above is that, in my fifty odd years on this planet, it’s become obvious that money does not cure all societal ills. It’s how money is spent and controlled that is the most important thing.

A prime example is Covid.

In Healthcare, there is no doubt, during covid, that the government chucked money at it. And this was the case for quite some time. Trusts could have all the staff it needed, all the computers it needed, all the wards it needed, etc. PPE was a different matter. That took TOO long to come through. But again, that wasn’t so much about dosh, as about availability of PPE.

However.. track and trace was a different matter. Many many many millions were thrown at this nonsense system, contracts given out like confetti and, in most circles, it was seen as a complete waste of money. It wasn’t what was spent (huge amounts), it was ‘how’ it was spent. 
Many would argue that a ‘higher quality society’ is actually one where the amount of money spent on the public purse, isn’t huge. Because it doesn’t need to be. People look after their own health, crime rates are low because people are employed, earning decent money, occupied etc. 
And in education, for instance, very few argue that the standard of education in private schools, with classes of 20 kids, is probably going to deliver a ‘higher quality’ of education that a state comprehensive with class sizes of 40 plus. 
It all depends which side of the fence we fall on. But don’t believe that just because Labour state ‘they’ll spend more on education’ that it’s going to somehow lead to a ‘higher quality society’. It might not. If it always did, Labour would not have suffered landslide losses in the last three general elections.

Labour will get in, then we’ll see. I hope you’re right to be honest. God knows, we’ve all had enough of crime being so high, hidden taxation in its many forms and having to wait so long for GP’s appts. (That’s not due to availability of GP’s by the way, that’s due to them not being employed in sufficient quantities, possibly because their salaries (raised hugely under the Labour govt of 1997) just aren’t affordable to many GP practices)

But it ain’t as straightforward as you’re seemingly thinking.

[Guest Col city fan]

22 minutes ago, Foxin_Mad said:

Whilst I agree to a point you have to be careful with the mantra that more money means better service which it doesn't.

 

I actually agree id pay more tax if I felt it would improve many things in this country that currently fail us all. I also support Nationalising things where it being in private ownership offer zero benefit, for example water. The regulators of the private sector need to grow some balls and ask questions, like why is the UK paying more for gas than Europe even though we produce more gas. 

 

Alongside better funding we probably also need full reform and better management of the full civil service (which many wont like), some services are operating in a vastly different world to when they were formed. A national care service is necessary which would support many of the other areas, police, schools, hospitals etc which are currently doing social care they should not be doing. We also need to be sure we are supporting homeless people and people with addictions properly, to try and break the cycle.  

Bang on 

[FoxesDeb]

2 hours ago, Col city fan said:

The money is there mate

We cant get the staff due to there not being enough nurses nationally. We’re recruiting again this year for International Nurses. Brexit has had zero impact on this. Zero.. which is great because some of the IR Nurses are superb to work with.

 

Are you sure about this?

[StanSP]

8 minutes ago, Col city fan said:

I don’t know your age Stan, and you always seem to be a pleasant young man, although again a little passive-aggressive imo.

But having conversations with you like this,  makes me think you come across as a typical leftie student-type who believes that the world should be a totally equal place and that the moon is made of cheese etc.

One thing I’ve tried to explain above is that, in my fifty odd years on this planet, it’s become obvious that money does not cure all societal ills. It’s how money is spent and controlled that is the most important thing.

A prime example is Covid.

In Healthcare, there is no doubt, during covid, that the government chucked money at it. And this was the case for quite some time. Trusts could have all the staff it needed, all the computers it needed, all the wards it needed, etc. PPE was a different matter. That took TOO long to come through. But again, that wasn’t so much about dosh, as about availability of PPE.

However.. track and trace was a different matter. Many many many millions were thrown at this nonsense system, contracts given out like confetti and, in most circles, it was seen as a complete waste of money. It wasn’t what was spent (huge amounts), it was ‘how’ it was spent. 
Many would argue that a ‘higher quality society’ is actually one where the amount of money spent on the public purse, isn’t huge. Because it doesn’t need to be. People look after their own health, crime rates are low because people are employed, earning decent money, occupied etc. 
And in education, for instance, very few argue that the standard of education in private schools, with classes of 20 kids, is probably going to deliver a ‘higher quality’ of education that a state comprehensive with class sizes of 40 plus. 
It all depends which side of the fence we fall on. But don’t believe that just because Labour state ‘they’ll spend more on education’ that it’s going to somehow lead to a ‘higher quality society’. It might not. If it always did, Labour would not have suffered landslide losses in the last three general elections.

Labour will get in, then we’ll see. I hope you’re right to be honest. God knows, we’ve all had enough of crime being so high, hidden taxation in its many forms and having to wait so long for GP’s appts. (That’s not due to availability of GP’s by the way, that’s due to them not being employed in sufficient quantities, possibly because their salaries (raised hugely under the Labour govt of 1997) just aren’t affordable to many GP practices)

But it ain’t as straightforward as you’re seemingly thinking.

Perhaps don't assume everyone fits into a category based what you read on a forum? Not saying we're all gonna be mega different, but with respect you don't know me and I don't know you. So I won't label you or categorise you, out of respect too. 

 

I agree about my passive aggression. No denying that but I also make no apologies for it

 

I also agree that more money doesn't equal better services at the click of a finger. I understand it is much more than that. I understand that even if money is given out to each service, it has to be appropriated and given out sensibly. But what we have all seen across the board under this government is services being decimated in 14 yrs and services/individuals either giving the service or receiving it have suffered greatly because in general the money hasn't been there. There may be examples of funding being given in isolated cases (perhaps in your experience?) but overall it doesn't follow suit across the country.

 

Interesting you bring up crime rates as that's something that has had a direct effect on cuts made by Tories. 

They destroyed youth social services, which in turn led people away from local community projects and had them (not everyone, I know) turn to and resort to crime. Under previous governments these kinds of services in the heart of communities were present - local neighbourhood police & youth clubs for example. There used to be so many and they were beneficial for the communities they served. And this is something I can 100% fall back on as evidence in various residential areas and estates I've worked in since 2010. 

 

I don't want to come across as thinking Labour are some kind of magician or geniuses and that all of life's problems will be solved on 5th July. But I'd like to think we're giving the next generation a better start in life with Tories out and at least giving someone else a chance to get society into a better place. I think Labour will make progress in doing that but it takes time to undo such destruction of society and the Tories have to hold some accountability to that. 

[Guest Col city fan]

1 minute ago, StanSP said:

Perhaps don't assume everyone fits into a category based what you read on a forum? Not saying we're all gonna be mega different, but with respect you don't know me and I don't know you. So I won't label you or categorise you, out of respect too. 

 

I agree about my passive aggression. No denying that but I also make no apologies for it

 

I also agree that more money doesn't equal better services at the click of a finger. I understand it is much more than that. I understand that even if money is given out to each service, it has to be appropriated and given out sensibly. But what we have all seen across the board under this government is services being decimated in 14 yrs and services/individuals either giving the service or receiving it have suffered greatly because in general the money hasn't been there. There may be examples of funding being given in isolated cases (perhaps in your experience?) but overall it doesn't follow suit across the country.

 

Interesting you bring up crime rates as that's something that has had a direct effect on cuts made by Tories. 

They destroyed youth social services, which in turn led people away from local community projects and had them (not everyone, I know) turn to and resort to crime. Under previous governments these kinds of services in the heart of communities were present - local neighbourhood police & youth clubs for example. There used to be so many and they were beneficial for the communities they served. And this is something I can 100% fall back on as evidence in various residential areas and estates I've worked in since 2010. 

 

I don't want to come across as thinking Labour are some kind of magician or geniuses and that all of life's problems will be solved on 5th July. But I'd like to think we're giving the next generation a better start in life with Tories out and at least giving someone else a chance to get society into a better place. I think Labour will make progress in doing that but it takes time to undo such destruction of society and the Tories have to hold some accountability to that. 

Great post Stan. Not patronising you but this makes sense.

I’m 50 odd but agree entirely on youth services. The kids these days have so few venues to go and be with each other. Whether they WOULD go, is a different question. I used to love my youth club when I was a kid, would always go to it and made some great pals there. But that was before X-box, the internet etc..

One thing I despise is the image of young people tearing up their local communities. It happened a couple of times last year in Blaby, where the central shopping precinct was ripped apart by ‘bored kids’ (allegedly) and I thought then, have they much to do?

Personally I’d also entertain myself (footy, fishing, tennis in the summer) etc and wouldn’t have even considered smashing something up, cos mum would have killed me.

So yes, more for the youth to do, BUT encouraging them to do it, just as important 

👍

[The Doctor]

2 hours ago, Izzy said:

Sunak won’t continue as Tory leader when they lose will he? I assume he’ll fvck off to the US or something. 

not a chance, he'll resign and go pick up a 7 figure salary in the US as a political advisor for some tech company, a la Nick Clegg

[Foxin_Mad]

6 minutes ago, Col city fan said:

Great post Stan. Not patronising you but this makes sense.

I’m 50 odd but agree entirely on youth services. The kids these days have so few venues to go and be with each other. Whether they WOULD go, is a different question. I used to love my youth club when I was a kid, would always go to it and made some great pals there. But that was before X-box, the internet etc..

One thing I despise is the image of young people tearing up their local communities. It happened a couple of times last year in Blaby, where the central shopping precinct was ripped apart by ‘bored kids’ (allegedly) and I thought then, have they much to do?

Personally I’d also entertain myself (footy, fishing, tennis in the summer) etc and wouldn’t have even considered smashing something up, cos mum would have killed me.

So yes, more for the youth to do, BUT encouraging them to do it, just as important 

👍

This is the key thing here, I am not sure what has happened but I would never have dreamed no matter how 'bored' I was of smashing something up, or turning to crime, like you say my parents would have killed me! I am not sure how that kind of duty of morals and respect comes from, how we help to develop it? Obviously some people need guidance and support in these areas. Like near me some youths smashed up a bus station, I don't understand in what world that is fun or entertainment. Like it would be nice to make me thing these people are misguided and can be helped , I'm not sure on the best ways of achieving this but I am genuinely not against us paying for anything where we are making the country a genuinely better place for all, if people have genuine solutions that work. 

[worth_the_wait]

2 hours ago, Sampson said:

Huh? I’m talking about representation of 2024 nor 2019, people have been saying “it won’t be as bad as predicted” for months bur the polls consistently show the Tories getting ridiculously small vote shares and that below the under 65 age brackets, people voteshare towards Tory is barely into double digits. It isn’t budging.
 

People need to realise traditional voting patterns and traditional adages about how the country vote and the “silent minority of Tory voters” no longer apply. The political landscape has changed since 2016

 

As I said, their vote will be well down on 2019, but I don't think it will collapse quite as much as some people are expecting.

 

I'd guess down from 44% to maybe 30%, but I think some people are expecting it to disappear altogether.

 

(obviously you'd expect the FoxesTalk poll to be weighted a bit towards the younger demographics ... although 2% did seem a little on the low side!)

 

[Sir Steve Howard]

On 01/07/2024 at 08:00, Grebfromgrebland said:

Probably best not to know. 

 

 

Edit. Sorry just noticed you said anonymous. But it looks like about a fifth of people on the reform side which is terrifying for me and my children. 

 

These people must look at Russia and think that's the life I want.

Based on this comment I imagine what you know about Russia could be written on the back of a postage stamp

[Sampson]

14 minutes ago, worth_the_wait said:

 

As I said, their vote will be well down on 2019, but I don't think it will collapse quite as much as some people are expecting.

 

I'd guess down from 44% to maybe 30%, but I think some people are expecting it to disappear altogether.

 

(obviously you'd expect the FoxesTalk poll to be weighted a bit towards the younger demographics ... although 2% did seem a little on the low side!)

 

I think some people are in for quite a shock come Thursday if they still think Tories are getting 30% of the vote. 
 

I would be very surprised if the Tory share is anywhere near 30%. Most polls put it somewhere between 16-22% with that largely only being because of the over 65s, polls have shown Tories are barely scraping 10% of the vote in under 50s.

 

Again, no one has seen election figures like this in their lifetime and it’s not just in the UK - it’s all over Europe. Formerly fringe parties are making huge gains and traditional parties which have been popular since the industrialised era are collapsing. 
 

I don’t think you can rely on “the silent majority” anymore, demographics have changed, new generations are voting and social media has greatly changed how people get their news and information and well, democracy is a lot more unstable than it was in 2015.

Edited 2 July by Sampson

[worth_the_wait]

3 minutes ago, Sampson said:

I think some people are in for quite a shock come Thursday if they still think Tories are getting 30% of the vote. 
 

I would be very surprised if the Tory share is anywhere near 30%. Most polls put it somewhere between 16-22% with that largely only being because of the over 65s, polls have shown Tories are barely scraping 10% of the vote in under 50s.

 

Again, no one has seen election figures like this in their lifetime and it’s not just in the UK - it’s all over Europe. Formerly fringe parties are making huge gains and traditional parties which have been popular since the industrialised era are collapsing. 
 

I don’t think you can rely on “the silent majority” anymore, demographics have changed, new generations are voting and social media has greatly changed how people get their news and information and well, democracy is a lot more unstable than it was in 2015.

Ok, last post of the day from me.    I've guessed 30%.    What's your % guess?   

 

Winner gets to say "yah boo, sucks raspberries" to the other one!   

 

[Sampson]

4 minutes ago, worth_the_wait said:

Ok, last post of the day from me.    I've guessed 30%.    What's your % guess?   

 

Winner gets to say "yah boo, sucks raspberries" to the other one!   

 

Ok fair enough my guess is 18% then, which will be similar to Reform and probably around 4-8% above Lib Dems.

 

Overall I’d probably guess -

 

Labour 36%
Conservatives 18%
Reform 17%
Lib Dems 13%

Edited 2 July by Sampson

[Kopic]

At this stage I have no idea who to vote for. I've had 8 different bits of election literature posted through my door, all of them from the lib dems, a party I can't vote for for personal reasons. Two of them were delivered to me by name, one of them hand written (which I found a bit creepy tbh). All have gone straight into recycling. 

 

I grew up in a strong tory household, who are now all voting remain. I won't vote remain.

 

I've noticed a lot of lib dem signs around my area (a safe tory seat), but in the past few days there's been a hell of a lot of reform signs gone up. The tactical vote site seems to indicate lib dem as the way to get the tory out, but even they don't seem too sure and only updated it a few days ago. Either way as I said I won't ever vote for them. I'll probably vote Labour, but again not for any reason other than because I don't want to vote for the others more.

[FoxyPV]

There is ALWAYS money, just never for the things that society needs.

 

One shitty labour term isn't going to fix the 40+ years of Thatcherite nonsense that has destroyed the UK.

 

Crime rates are higher because all social care and opportunities have been cut to shreds, add to that grinding poverty caused by shit wages and expensive living costs.

 

The NHS is struggling because of chronic underfunding and the knock on impacts of social care been demolished.

 

Why Brexit can't be reversed, I'll never know. It's been a proven car crash with no benefit except to the 0.1%. (referenda can be reversed)

 

Housing has become a joke because of vulture capital and foreign investment firms buying up hoards of London and other places making it unaffordable which then pushes up prices in other areas.

 

Education has become fully devalued both as a career and societally in its standing.

 

The Tories (and New Labour) have sold everything they can to the point where to buy it back would be exorbitant.