Why do so many english people vote conservative?

Page 1 of 1 [ 14 posts ] 

Topcat16
Raven
Raven

User avatar

Joined: 19 Feb 2010
Age: 29
Gender: Male
Posts: 101

10 May 2010, 7:24 pm

whilst wales, scotland and i;ll exclude northern ireland which has its own unionists who it votes in regurarlyy all opt for labour or nationalist party



auntblabby
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Feb 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 99,790
Location: the island of defective toy santas

11 May 2010, 2:29 am

if i were you, i'd get on my knees and thank almighty god that england [for now] lacks an american-style conservative party/republican party/tea party.



sarek
Pileated woodpecker
Pileated woodpecker

User avatar

Joined: 18 Apr 2010
Age: 57
Gender: Male
Posts: 190
Location: Noord-Holland or thereabouts

11 May 2010, 3:20 am

Maybe because it is an Island?

Before you laugh. I am from the continent but my girl lives in London so I can compare the different cultures. It really does make a difference.
These days with air planes, tunnels and the internet its hard to stop outside influences but there is still a barrier remaining.
Its just enough to resist change.


_________________
It is time
To break the chains of life
If you follow you will see
What beyond reality


Tequila
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 25 Feb 2006
Age: 32
Gender: Male
Posts: 28,897
Location: Lancashire, UK

11 May 2010, 4:10 am

Because England is a fundamentally conservative nation. The Welsh and the Scottish are more socialist and NI is divided almost entirely on national lines.

Some of us vote UKIP instead. The Tories got the most seats this time and won in my constituency with another massive majority.



gemstone123
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Aug 2008
Age: 28
Gender: Female
Posts: 1,196
Location: UK

12 May 2010, 8:23 am

There have always been areas in England where the Conservatives have had a majority, usually a deciding factor being a person's background. In a more working class area you would be more inclined to expect Labour to be a majority.
In inner city London the majority of seats won were by Labour it was the outskirts that went more Conservative.
The Conservatives have won so many more seats this time around because people in England are disillusioned with Labour and the Lib dems haven't really offered a good enough alternative. Whereas if you look at the UK General Election in 1997 the Labour Party had a huge majority of seats. It changes.
There has been a rise in the smaller Parties though.


_________________
Am usually bored so PMs are welcome!

Time is a great teacher, but unfortunately it kills all its pupils ...


Tequila
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 25 Feb 2006
Age: 32
Gender: Male
Posts: 28,897
Location: Lancashire, UK

12 May 2010, 6:18 pm

gemstone123 wrote:
There has been a rise in the smaller Parties though.


UKIP (the party I'm in) got over half a million votes but no seats.



Warsie
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 3 Apr 2008
Age: 30
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,542
Location: Chicago, IL, USA

12 May 2010, 9:24 pm

Topcat16 wrote:
whilst wales, scotland and i;ll exclude northern ireland which has its own unionists who it votes in regurarlyy all opt for labour or nationalist party


Well the other member nations of the UK were screwed over by England somehow historically - especially Wales and Scotland. So naturally, those member nations would be more radically anti-hierachial and pro-independence. England is the dominanting force in the UK and made the other member nations subservient to the English - so they don't feel a need to be independent to preserve their culture.

Also see the UK dude saying 'England is a fundamentally conservative nation' compared to the Scottish who are anti-hierachial and more clannish/socialistic etc.

EDIT: also hopefully Scotland and Wales become independent nations who are members of the EU. Also set rid of the royal family ;)


_________________
I am a Star Wars Fan, Warsie here.
Masterdebating on chi-city's south side.......!


puddingmouse
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 24 Apr 2010
Age: 34
Gender: Female
Posts: 8,777
Location: Cottonopolis

13 May 2010, 3:50 pm

Same reason many people in USA do - they think they're richer than they actually are. Or at least they think they might be rich one day, and so they identify with the interests of rich people. It's a very stratified, aspirational society.

I think Wales in particular always had a more egalitarian way of doing things - and Scotland just really hates the Conservative party. I'm from a part of England full of chavs who don't vote and old people who always vote Labour. I think the Conservative party hates the likes of us more than it hates Scotland and Wales. Wales actually elected 4 Tory MPs.



Exclavius
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 3 May 2010
Age: 47
Gender: Male
Posts: 632
Location: Ontario, Canada

13 May 2010, 7:41 pm

England was always the seat of Great Britain/UK
It controlled and thus benefited from the aristocracy where money is power.
The other regions did not, for the most part they resigned themselves to be ruled by foreigners and suffered for it.
Correct me if I am wrong, but England is "richer per capita" than Scotland, NI or wales.
Richer votes conservative.
Poorer votes liberal/social.
Working poor vote union.
(on the average anyways)

The roots of all this are so old that the people that cast the votes don't even really know WHY they vote one way or another, they just feel it.. it's custom, and it's tradition.

No surprise that England is more Conservative, the others more Left. (well.. parties that appear to be left... I honestly don't see the modern Labour party as more left than the Tories.) Though the balance of power IS now in the hands of the only real (at least sensibly real) left voice in the UK.



zer0netgain
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 2 Mar 2009
Age: 53
Gender: Male
Posts: 6,612

14 May 2010, 7:17 am

puddingmouse wrote:
Same reason many people in USA do - they think they're richer than they actually are. Or at least they think they might be rich one day, and so they identify with the interests of rich people. It's a very stratified, aspirational society.


But of course.

America is about every person having the opportunity to become wealthy by the work of their own hands. Heavy taxation and other socialist policies actually discourage innovation and creation because the state will take most of what you produce and hand it to people who did nothing.

There is over $3 TRILLION in "American money" overseas. Why is it not in America where it could be creating jobs and opportunity for the masses who are unemployed? It's because the current government wants to heavily tax that money, and those who hold the money prefer to use it in nations with more favorable attitudes towards those in a position to create jobs and opportunities for others.

History proves that lowering taxes increases revenues because it stimulates economic growth. The poor hardly pay any taxes, but they benefit the most from "government programs." The middle class pays the highest percentage of taxes and the "rich" (most of which being entrepreneurs who grew their wealth via hard work, not inheritance) pay the most in taxes but neither group gets hardly anything back in "government programs."

If you want to help the poor, help grow the economy so they can get jobs and be self-sufficient. Don't focus on stealing money from those who have so you can dole it out to those who don't.



Topcat16
Raven
Raven

User avatar

Joined: 19 Feb 2010
Age: 29
Gender: Male
Posts: 101

14 May 2010, 7:32 am

I know a lot of people say england exploited them and they did, but the britisish empire ddid have a great many scots and welsh, irish aristocrats who took part in imperial exploitation, and a great many others benefited from british enlightenment (men like Livingstone and Moffat) glasgow or is it edinburgh was also the second city of the empire.
Cameron- a very scottish family name, also the clannish thing really did get broken up by the clearances.- the islands and higlands vote liberal democrat i believe anyway

I think perhaps its more than just exploitation trends



Last edited by Topcat16 on 14 May 2010, 7:41 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Exclavius
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 3 May 2010
Age: 47
Gender: Male
Posts: 632
Location: Ontario, Canada

14 May 2010, 7:46 am

lowering taxes doesn't help the poor like you claim.

Regan proved that with his failed attempts at trying to apply laffer curve economics.



gemstone123
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Aug 2008
Age: 28
Gender: Female
Posts: 1,196
Location: UK

16 May 2010, 7:44 am

Tequila wrote:
gemstone123 wrote:
There has been a rise in the smaller Parties though.


UKIP (the party I'm in) got over half a million votes but no seats.


That's because of the voting system. Besides the Green Party gained a seat.


_________________
Am usually bored so PMs are welcome!

Time is a great teacher, but unfortunately it kills all its pupils ...


zer0netgain
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 2 Mar 2009
Age: 53
Gender: Male
Posts: 6,612

16 May 2010, 8:02 am

Exclavius wrote:
lowering taxes doesn't help the poor like you claim.

Regan proved that with his failed attempts at trying to apply laffer curve economics.


Careful with that claim.

"Trickle down economics" was a failure, but IIRC, the tax relief went to key parties, not everyone. As a general policy, reducing taxation ON EVERYONE stimulates the economy because most wealth is generated by "rich" people who are sole proprietors who make over $200,000 on their business income...employing under 500 people. Most taxes are hardest on this group while most tax benefits go to mega corps, not the "small business" owner.