What are Tories not doing right?

[Moscow Mule]

No I don't agree with that. It is the Opposition's job to keep the Govt on their toes, surely? Check and balances and all that.

It's a bit hard when the government has a majority of 100+ and can push through whatever they feel like...

[Sysman]

It's a bit hard when the government has a majority of 100+ and can push through whatever they feel like...

True, but they seemed to have given up trying.

[AtW]

True, but they seemed to have given up trying.

I think they gave Govt hard time on that fox ban thingy...

[centurian]

I think they gave Govt hard time on that fox ban thingy...

So they let them get away with decimating the economy, but gave them a bit of heat over foxes

[AtW]

So they let them get away with decimating the economy, but gave them a bit of heat over foxes

Labour had majority so they are fully responsible for decimation of the economy by putting it into huge debt.

That said I don't think Tories would have done anything about house price bubble - all was perfect in Nu Liebor communism so anyone who tried to oppose this insanity publicly would not exactly be very popular.

Who was listening to Vince Cable? Nobody, they don't even now - frankly I'd prefer him to be the next Chancellor.

[DodgyAgent]

Labour had majority so they are fully responsible for decimation of the economy by putting it into huge debt.

That said I don't think Tories would have done anything about house price bubble - all was perfect in Nu Liebor communism so anyone who tried to oppose this insanity publicly would not exactly be very popular.

Who was listening to Vince Cable? Nobody, they don't even now - frankly I'd prefer him to be the next Chancellor.

And what is there on Vince cable's Cv that makes you think he has any competence beyond being able to talk a good game.

[hyperD]

So given that things are twice as bad now and we are still in recession (which might technically change shortly - although the perception still won't change), why are things still close.

It's a good question. I believe it is to do with generations of disinterest in politics generally and the fact that the big three have rushed to the middle ground, so there is little perceived difference in policy.

People have more interest in celebrity than current affairs. Voter turnout is an all time low.

The creeping involvement of government into the MSM - for instance lobby journalism, BBC bias and commercial radio stations, such as LBC, having a large amount of government public information messages rather than commercial business adverts.

Student politics are full of LGBT and minority extremists and are a general disinterest to the many that are simply enjoying new found freedoms and getting pissed.

We have slowly, little by little, accepted that the state will take care of all our decisions. If there's a problem, it's not for us to solve, it's for the state.

"There's snow outside my house. It's for the state to clean up, for fear of being sued."

"I can't get a job. It's not my fault. What are the state going to do about it?"

"My child isn't doing well at school. He must have an '-ism' or it's the teachers fault. What is the state going to do about it?"

"I demand it my right to bring my children to a restaurant and demand that the staff look after them while I have my meal."

It's all me, me, me and what is in it for me.

The change in society has been subtle. How many of us simply say oh, it's my fault, I'll sort that out. Or I'm sorry, I made a mistake.

Look at the reaction it provokes at social occasions when you talk about immigration, or burqas or any other minority flavor du jour - the collective clenching of a thousand middle class sphincters is almost audible.

Some of my best friends are socialists. Staggering listening to them vomit forth this ridiculous ideological, fatuous bulltulip. Watching the hypocrisy of Blair, Harriet Harman, Diane Abbott and Ruth Kelly go on about the fairness of state education and then decide that the state education on offer was only good enough for other people's children. In their hypocrisy they are typically Socialists.

It is the disinterest of people in their country and its people and their focus upon themselves, not holding politicians to account and the biggest lie of all: "what's the point, I can't make a difference anyway".

Politics is about catering for the marginal seats, where a slightly off message announcement by an MP is anathma to party HQ. The whole treading on eggshells, the expenses fiasco, the lack of real choice amongst parties.

There is a massive disconnect between an unaccountable career politician sucking at the taxpayers teat and the daily burden and hardship experienced by your average man on the street.

Sorry, I've come across all ranty...


So really, to summarise: it's a total disinterest, expecting the state to absolve our responsibilities, a resentment of an unaccountable political elite and the helpless feeling that there isn't a suitable alternative, the self-flagellation of well-off champagne socialist's guilt, the partisanship of deluded voters "My grandaddy voted for x, ma daddy voted for x, so I'm voting for x", and public sector turkeys not voting for christmas...

[AtW]

And what is there on Vince cable's Cv that makes you think he has any competence beyond being able to talk a good game.

He was right on a number of things - particularly when it came to banks getting into debt games.

[BrilloPad]

Maybe the electorate have sussed that there is little difference between Labour/Tory?

On the other hand surely if that were the case they would vote for a minor party....

[swamp]

News has a short shelf life, and the recession is becoming old news. There is no clear difference between the parties.

Call me Dave is also not really PM material, but he's the best bet for the Tories. Actually I think William Hague would be much better, but he had his chance.