Who Did You Vote For in GE 2019?

[TeemuVanBasten 3,327]

Self explanatory

[TeemuVanBasten 3,327]

I think its anon, don't worry shy Tory's

[Nuff Said 4,218]

You do realise that there’s only about 20 posters who look at Non-Football?

[TeemuVanBasten 3,327]

24 minutes ago, Nuff Said said:

You do realise that there’s only about 20 posters who look at Non-Football?

Tragic that

They've each looked at the Brexit thread about 30,000 times then!

[Herman 8,483]

1 hour ago, Nuff Said said:

You do realise that there’s only about 20 posters who look at Non-Football?

And 19 of them are the same person. 

[The Raptor 935]

On 22/07/2022 at 16:32, Herman said:

And 19 of them are the same person. 

No we're not! 

[TheGunnShow 4,802]

Labour as a tactical vote as between them, the Tories and Labour get 90% of the vote here, but Chris Green won a bigger majority.

[Nuff Said 4,218]

On 22/07/2022 at 15:34, TeemuVanBasten said:

Tragic that

They've each looked at the Brexit thread about 30,000 times then!

14 votes so far, so there are six still to vote, including me. And for the avoidance of doubt, I am definitely not a shy Tory.

[littleyellowbirdie 1,813]

Given the obvious prevalence of Conservative voters in Norfolk, the notable disengagement of any Conservative voters from this side of the forum is quite remarkable; it makes you wonder if there's something about the content that puts them off engaging at all. 

[Herman 8,483]

56 minutes ago, littleyellowbirdie said:

Given the obvious prevalence of Conservative voters in Norfolk, the notable disengagement of any Conservative voters from this side of the forum is quite remarkable; it makes you wonder if there's something about the content that puts them off engaging at all. 

They probably struggle with reading and writing. 

[canarydan23 3,606]

6 hours ago, littleyellowbirdie said:

Given the obvious prevalence of Conservative voters in Norfolk, the notable disengagement of any Conservative voters from this side of the forum is quite remarkable; it makes you wonder if there's something about the content that puts them off engaging at all. 

As John Stuart Mill said, "Conservatives are not necessarily stupid, but most stupid people are conservatives".

It's probably something about their inability to operate a computer.

[Naturalcynic 419]

This poll of only 17 (so far) respondents reflects the reality that the left tend to be far more active on social media than the right.  Hence the danger of believing that trends on Twitter actually represent the concerns of wider society.

[TheGunnShow 4,802]

That labours (pun intended) under the misconception that Labour are left wing. They were under Corbyn, they look pretty centrist under Starmer.

[Naturalcynic 419]

1 hour ago, TheGunnShow said:

That labours (pun intended) under the misconception that Labour are left wing. They were under Corbyn, they look pretty centrist under Starmer.

In 2019 the Conservatives got 43.6% of the vote, but on this poll of Pink’un commenters they have so far only received 11.1%.  Labour got 32.1% compared with 50% on here, and the Greens got about 4% but on here are currently on 22.2%.  So what can we conclude?  Probably only that the current sample size is too small to be statistically significant, although it does suggest that I and others are correct in stating that those on the left tend to be more active in promoting their views on social media.

[TheGunnShow 4,802]

Just now, Naturalcynic said:

In 2019 the Conservatives got 43.6% of the vote, but on this poll of Pink’un commenters they have so far only received 11.1%.  Labour got 32.1% compared with 50% on here, and the Greens got about 4% but on here are currently on 22.2%.  So what can we conclude?  Probably only that the current sample size is too small to be statistically significant, although it does suggest that I and others are correct in stating that those on the left tend to be more active in promoting their views on social media.

The "shy Tory effect" is well-noted. I agree that this would be statistically insignificant, but for the same token, would say for the same reason that deducing any form of conclusion would be a stretch.

Not to forget, as our electoral model is so poor, there's no means of distinguishing between those who truly support the party in question, or thought "lesser of two evils". Think this is less pronounced with those who voted Green or LibDem unless they're in seats where those parties do have a history of good local-level support in the seat in question.

[Herman 8,483]

2 hours ago, Naturalcynic said:

This poll of only 17 (so far) respondents reflects the reality that the left tend to be far more active on social media than the right.  Hence the danger of believing that trends on Twitter actually represent the concerns of wider society.

The bad news for you is that all polling shows that your viewpoints are in the minority. The good news for you is that the progressive vote is split into many parties. This gives the false impression that right wing policies are popular. 

[sonyc 4,873]

Yep, agree with Herman and TheGunnShow here about the post by @Naturalcynic. It is too simplistic to cast 'left' into a category. The left vote is hugely split. I rarely vote in polls (Green for me...though there was no chance of updating our Tory whatever). Despite being left of centre, I rarely, if ever, post on social media, certainly not politics (apart from this forum...depends if you think this constitutes SM). 

The point I wanted to make though is that I believe that those of more progressive thought want a better world, tend to be more idealistic etc and look for the best in human nature. Wanting to see the best in human nature is a key difference.

Given the events of the last decade especially we've witnessed some terrible governments who through mismanagement, chronyism and austerity (let's call this what it is and was ...imposed poverty) have led to even greater inequality in society. It's something that makes people who care a lot very angry. And very upset. People working in the NHS, in schools, in community settings etc etc see it every day.

So...a throw away line about the left being active on social media is only a hint of peoples' feelings.

Personally, I would hope that a caring society would make their views known more. God bless this part of the Pinkun. It is made up of people who call out stuff. Those same 'left' posters also post positive threads - about music, nature etc. I simply think these posters have a caring disposition.

That reframes your post I think and makes for a different perspective. Though your user name at least means you're unlikely to agree being naturally cynical

[Naturalcynic 419]

18 minutes ago, Herman said:

The bad news for you is that all polling shows that your viewpoints are in the minority. The good news for you is that the progressive vote is split into many parties. This gives the false impression that right wing policies are popular. 

I haven’t stated how I voted, so you’re making assumptions.  However, I’m always intrigued when people talk about “progressive” parties.  Does this really mean any party that isn’t Conservative?  Are the SNP, a party of devout separatist nationalists, really “progressive”?  Because it seems to me that if you’re so quick to lump all of these parties together then either there are no real policy differences between them, or all you care about is getting rid of the Tories.  

[Herman 8,483]

I've read your posts. I can quite confidently predict who you vote for. 

[Naturalcynic 419]

7 minutes ago, Herman said:

I've read your posts. I can quite confidently predict who you vote for. 

If you must know, my voting history has included both Conservative and Labour and I occupy a fairly centrist position.  Although my political views generally tend more to the Conservative side of the middle ground, I am what is commonly known as a floating voter.

[sonyc 4,873]

1 hour ago, Naturalcynic said:

I haven’t stated how I voted, so you’re making assumptions.  However, I’m always intrigued when people talk about “progressive” parties.  Does this really mean any party that isn’t Conservative?  Are the SNP, a party of devout separatist nationalists, really “progressive”?  Because it seems to me that if you’re so quick to lump all of these parties together then either there are no real policy differences between them, or all you care about is getting rid of the Tories.  

It's an odd term and can feel a bit amorphous and loose in definition I would agree. Many politicians use it.

The best description (I've just googled) is this I reckon:

 

Progressive politics starts from a deep belief in social justice. That politics has the power to change lives, particularly for those who need a helping hand. It is based on a vision to improve citizens’ lives across the country, across divides, across backgrounds. Knowing that societies should be judged on how much we help those who need it. With a commitment that each person is equal, progressive politics aims to deliver equality of opportunity for all, creating a level playing field for success. Critically, progressives embrace the future, confront the challenges of our time and have an optimistic vision for society.

 

I Probably like it because it matches my own sense of the meaning. I reckon having a positive view of human nature and being optimistic is a key point as I've posted above.

[Naturalcynic 419]

1 minute ago, sonyc said:

It's an odd term and can feel a bit amorphous and loose in definition I would agree. Many politicians use it.

The best description (I've just googled) is this I reckon:

 

Progressive politics starts from a deep belief in social justice. That politics has the power to change lives, particularly for those who need a helping hand. It is based on a vision to improve citizens’ lives across the country, across divides, across backgrounds. Knowing that societies should be judged on how much we help those who need it. With a commitment that each person is equal, progressive politics aims to deliver equality of opportunity for all, creating a level playing field for success. Critically, progressives embrace the future, confront the challenges of our time and have an optimistic vision for society.

 

I Probably like it because it matches my own sense of the meaning. I reckon having a positive view of human nature and being optimistic is a key point as I've posted above.

A reasonable definition, and I suspect many Conservatives would also agree with those principles, but I doubt other “progressives” would let them join the club.

[TheGunnShow 4,802]

I think when the likes of Rory Stewart and Dominic Grieve were purged out of the Tory Party under Johnson, it looked to me like the Tory powers-that-be were all about throwing them out of the club and slowly began to have the likes of Rees-Mogg nearer their centre. Not to mention that the likes of Anna Soubry left. 

Could say, considering David Cameron was a devout Christian who legalised gay marriage, that he was an example of a Tory with a progressive edge now and again.

Edited July 29, 2022 by TheGunnShow

[sonyc 4,873]

12 minutes ago, Naturalcynic said:

A reasonable definition, and I suspect many Conservatives would also agree with those principles, but I doubt other “progressives” would let them join the club.

A lot of people want the best for society. But our UK society has moved far too far in favour of those who already have huge privilege. Too many people are on very low wages and worse, have little say. It is not useful or positive is it for wider society - it will lead to more crime, worse health outcomes etc.

The plans to remove more rights from workers should concern all, like the right to strike. We are headed back to the days of unrest, back to the 19th century even. That's not progressive but the opposite. Yet it's what we are hearing, incredibly, from the two Tory leadership candidates.

[Naturalcynic 419]

9 minutes ago, sonyc said:

The plans to remove more rights from workers should concern all, like the right to strike. We are headed back to the days of unrest, back to the 19th century even. That's not progressive but the opposite. Yet it's what we are hearing, incredibly, from the two Tory leadership candidates.

Equally it could quite reasonably be argued that after more than two years of the continuing economic impacts of the pandemic, the costs of imposing sanctions against Putin’s regime, and the associated massive increases in the costs of food and energy, that trying to bring the almost bankrupt country to its knees through widespread strikes is very much not progressive at all but is a blatantly political action instigated by hardline union leaders and activists.

[SwindonCanary 448]

It seems as if Norwich were out of the voting in the last election 

[sonyc 4,873]

11 minutes ago, Naturalcynic said:

Equally it could quite reasonably be argued that after more than two years of the continuing economic impacts of the pandemic, the costs of imposing sanctions against Putin’s regime, and the associated massive increases in the costs of food and energy, that trying to bring the almost bankrupt country to its knees through widespread strikes is very much not progressive at all but is a blatantly political action instigated by hardline union leaders and activists.

Indeed. Some people definitely think like that. They hate strike action. It's a prevalent view in our UK history. People see strikers as the scum or as lazy people. 

If you're the son or grandson of a miner or a textile worker then you'd probably have a different world view. 

For me it's about working conditions and widening pay gaps between those who have and those have not.

 

[Naturalcynic 419]

6 minutes ago, sonyc said:

If you're the son or grandson of a miner or a textile worker then you'd probably have a different world view. 

Grandson of a miner, great-grandson of both and for many generations previously.

[Yellow Fever 3,019]

I voted tactically.

It was obvious even in 2019 that Johnson couldn't be trusted to tell the truth to anybody on anything. My view has been totally vindicated.

Oddly it took another 2 1/2 years for Tory MPs to come the same inevitable conclusion. In the interim they were either fully complicit in Johnson's lies or very very dumb.

 

Edited July 29, 2022 by Yellow Fever

[Naturalcynic 419]

13 minutes ago, sonyc said:

Indeed. Some people definitely think like that. They hate strike action. It's a prevalent view in our UK history. People see strikers as the scum or as lazy people. 

If you're the son or grandson of a miner or a textile worker then you'd probably have a different world view. 

For me it's about working conditions and widening pay gaps between those who have and those have not.

 

And don’t forget, those politically-motivated strikes in the 70s and 80s by the likes of Red Robbo, Arthur Scargill etc usually resulted in the complete annihilation of those industries and the loss of jobs for those members they purported to represent.