Ed Balls again

[MicrosoftBob]

Quite so.

For the majority, Labour is spending someone else's money, not their money, so they simply don't care. In fact they believe that the "well off" are rich and can afford it anyway, so probably the rich don't really miss the money. In return everything gets better (cos the papers say so) e.g. the NHS improves, benefits increase, education is better (no horrible Mr.Gove) and so on.

So everyone wins

EDIT: I'm starting to think, if you can't beat em, join em, and la la la to anyone who tells me otherwise.

The scary thing this is I know educated people that think like that, everything is Thatchers fault, or Goves fault in their weird bubble

[vetran]

Complete rubbish. Totally disagree.

WHY?

Explain and show working!

[d000hg]

Let's be fair the majority of the public aren't very sharp, so if they see a policy that directly benefits them they'll vote for that party.

I don't see how that's got anything to do with being smart. Nearly everyone votes on what they think will benefit them.

Do the middle class vote for Labour ?

Yes of course. Depending what you consider middle class, obviously.

[The Spartan]

I don't see how that's got anything to do with being smart. Nearly everyone votes on what they think will benefit them.

Unless it's you, who would always vote for the greater good of course

[vetran]

I don't see how that's got anything to do with being smart. Nearly everyone votes on what they think will benefit them.

Yes of course. Depending what you consider middle class, obviously.

the middle class thought 'maybe this Tony Bliar can combine compassion with conservative beliefs' he professed to be a christian with mainline beliefs and a supposed understanding of middle class values.

He however turned out to be spendthrift,gerrymandering, warmongering liar.

[DirtyDog]

Tories bring us back in the black and then Labour start again.

1996 - Deficit 29.2bn
1997 - Deficit 15.6bn
1998 - Surplus 0.7bn

Yep, it was the Tories that took Britain back into the black in 1998.

[d000hg]

the middle class thought 'maybe this Tony Bliar can combine compassion with conservative beliefs'

Did they? I thought he just attracted people by having some charisma, and everyone thought the Tories had been in long enough.

[DirtyDog]

Isnt the Labour party itself bankrupt ? They cannot even manage their own party finances.

The strategy of Labour is quite clear, create a core vote bank consisting of dimwits like DirtyDog and then borrow billions and spend on that vote bank. Those dim wits will keep voting them back to power and the cycle goes on.

I refer the honourable gentleman to the answer I gave some moments ago.

I'm not a Labour supporter.

For the hard of thinking, I'll reiterate - I am not a Labour supporter.

For the even harder of thinking, I'll expand - I do not vote Labour. I do not intend to vote Labour.

HTHBIVMDI

[Mich the Tester]

Did they? I thought he just attracted people by having some charisma, and everyone thought the Tories had been in long enough.

Some conservatives also turned people off; Peter Lilley and Michael Portillo came across as particularly arrogant and unsympathetic to people different to themselves and at the same time John Major was undermined by many in his own party. I think the conservatives could have stayed in power for much longer if not for their own hubris.

[DirtyDog]

the middle class thought 'maybe this Tony Bliar can combine compassion with conservative beliefs' he professed to be a christian with mainline beliefs and a supposed understanding of middle class values.

He however turned out to be spendthrift,gerrymandering, warmongering liar.

I think that people just wanted a change, and Blair had moved the party towards being electable my pandering to those who held sway in the important areas. The core Labour vote are unlikely to vote Conservative, whatever Labour say or do. However, the middle ground was where the battle was won, and Blair moved the party their successfully. Brown took the Labour party away from that middle ground and towards more "traditional" Labour territory, in a gamble which failed spectacularly.

In the same way, Cameron has aped Blair. He worked hard to detoxify the "nasty party" image - hug a husky, hug a hoodie, greenest government ever etc. etc. - and the middle (who were fed up of Labour and Brown in particular) voted that way. The disadvantage that Cameron has is that he has a party where there is a more vocal group of supporters who are willing to splinter away from the party towards others.

If Labour piss off their core voters, the core voters will still vote their way. If the Conservatives piss off their core voters, the core voters will vote for other parties that appeal to their political views. The big difference is that if you are a traditional Labour supporter, there is no other party for you to vote for, so you'll always stick with them.