SIGN UP

Are tories on the wane?

Avatar Image
sherminator | 13:23 Tue 11th May 2010 | News
15 Answers
Lil bit purposefully controversial this(but then compared to what some of our right wingers regularly post on this site i dont even know why i put that disclaimer on!)

Tories couldn't get a majority! After the most unpopular PM ever you would have thought this would have been the easist win ever..... but it wasn't! more to the point it still now looks like Cameron won't get in!

is conservatism on the way out? i Dont have any figures on past polls but is this a long term slide for the Tories and their ideology?

also our resident Right wingers always complain about the state of Britain but if the above is true does that mean that its the right wingers who are at odds with what this country is about and what it wants?

Answers

1 to 15 of 15rss feed

Best Answer

No best answer has yet been selected by sherminator. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.

For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
As I stated elsewhere, Clung to power because they have had 13 years to create Labour voters.....
"Labour got in because all the workshy layabouts, people on benefits, the Million non jobs in the public sector all vote labour because that's what labour do they enlarge the public sector for their cronies. It was always going to be a struggle to get them out. "
Who's Wayne, and doesn't he mind?

Serioulsy though, I don't think Tories are on the wane, I think the current political system is. We are a capitalist culture, and the vast majority of us like our little perks that we earn with our wages (whether it's your sports car, your make-up, your trophy girlfriend, or your days out to Thorpe Park); and as a result socialism is a dead concept. However, the recent scandals with expenses, the continuing p1ssing around by politicians of all three parties, the denial of referendums on europe, the inability of any major party to have serious discussions on immigration, the drain of the welfare state, and the general detachedness of politicians is just driving a wedge between them and the public.

I honestly belive, that if there had been a "None Of The Above" option on the papers, then that would have polled the majority of votes
'' It was always going to be a struggle to get them out. ''

As I posted elsewhere

Oh come come now, R1 Geezer .
Reading your posts over the last year , one could be forgiven for thinkinfg that , you were certain that the Tories would be swept into power , with a landslide victory .

I dont remember you posting anything about - it was going to be a struggle - it was a foregone conclusion , according to you
Question Author
'As I stated elsewhere, Clung to power because they have had 13 years to create Labour voters..... '

sorry dont really buy that as the amount of votes poolled by lib dem and labour are a lot higher than the tories.
Berti, I had hoped we'd get a majority and we may well have done but the lead was cut and what happenned happened.
In all fairness, the Tories are not in decline. They polled over a million higher in 2010 (10,683,787 votes) than Labour in 2005 (9,562,122 votes) and about the same as Labour in 2001 (10,724,953 votes). Labour had large majorities both times.

If last Thursday the number of votes that the Tories and Labour won had been reversed, then Labour would be in power with a majority of over 60 seats ...
No. Didn't they have more votes swing to them since the 30's?
So R1 Geezer, the same phenomenon that has according to you prevented Con from overturning Lab due to 13 years of Lab govt did not occur in 97 after 18 years of Con govt? 97 showed that after so long with an entrenched govt the situation can turn drastically around. With Brown so apparently villified, and 13 years of Labour and the Iraq war etc, shouldn't the Cons have walked it? The fact is, they didn't convince the electorate sufficiently. Your "workshy cronies" theory is too flimsy to explain the Cons' failure to win against such an embattled PM and administration.
We are little better than Zimbabwe or Afghanistan neither could get their leaders out even though they lost the vote.

The Conservatives won the election with more vote than Labour and more votes than the Lib-Dems,.but guess what Brown loses but still stays in power.

Couldn't Cameron have took power? I know he would have to seek votes from the Lib-Dems so as to get certain measures through parliament, but I am sure the Lib-Dems wouldn't vote against the Tory government providing they agreed with the measure, and after all it would be little different to a Tory Lib-Dem pact.
No Joolee, that was simply an overwealming desire for "change" an irrational attitude by the electorate. It was even mobilised by the Tories his time. In 1997 Britain had the strongest economy in Europe and where surging ahead, the result of The Tories taking 18 years to dig us out of the sh1te from the last Labour lot. The last years of that did so well in fact they created the conditions that took Labour 13 years to wreck what they normally manage in 4!
1990–1997: the Major years
In 1990 Margaret Thatcher stood down from the office of Prime Minister after not getting the political support she felt she needed to continue. John Major was elected her successor.

The British pound was tied to EU exchange rates, using the Deutsche Mark as a basis, as part of the Exchange Rate Mechanism (ERM); however, this resulted in disaster for Britain. The restrictions imposed by the ERM put pressure on the pound, leading to a run on the currency. Black Wednesday in 1992 ended British membership of the ERM. It also damaged the Conservatives' credibility of economic management, and contributed to the end of the 18 years of consecutive Conservative government in 1997.

Very convenient memory some people.

Joolee - this effect actual did happen pro-Tory in 1992 when everyone said they would lose but they survived.
-- answer removed --
The reason why Brown got so many votes in the election was because he has played the benefits card. So many of the population now depend on a benefit and Brown put the fear into them that they would be removed.
Do you mean to say that venom and lies were poured on our best ever Prime Minister Gordon-I-not-going-til-I'm-pushed-Brown! jatte you must wash your mouth out.

Unless you didn't notice, the Conservatives got the most votes and voted against Brown.
The Tories are in a very unusual position. In 1992 they won more votes than any other political party in British history, and the Conservatives are historically one of (if not the) most successful political parties in the history of the democratic world. They have been in worse positions before (e.g. late C19 - for decades they could only govern with unionist coalitions) and recovered.

Never forget that the Conservative party has a long history of flexibility and pragmatic adjustment to change, which has arguably been far less visible since Thatcher but is certainly still there. They're practically an institution in this country in a way that Labour just isn't (in fact Labour's pre-1997 history was overwhelmingly one of weakness - the past 13 years have been highly anomalous in British history). If anything I'd say the Conservatives are recovering strength from a highly unusual period of weakness.

1 to 15 of 15rss feed

Do you know the answer?

Are tories on the wane?

Answer Question >>

Related Questions

Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.