Why would you vote Conservative

The Tories wanted a centrist (on EU) person not one strongly aligned with either camp.

Well, they haven't got a centrist at the moment. They have got themselves a leader who has firmly thrown in her lot with the extreme right. No doubt in part due to her own prejudice against immigrants.

Yup. I read that as Corbyn/Labour didn't do as much as they should have in the referendum. I think he was either inept/ineffectual, or he sat back and hoped the Tories would collapse in confusion after a small majority to Remain vote.

I don't really care about what May did. She was elected leader after the referendum because she hadn't aligned strongly with either side. The Tories wanted a centrist (on EU) person not one strongly aligned with either camp.

(Which probably shows you can read what you like into statistics!)

Forgot to add this link:
lordashcroftpolls.com/2016/06/how-the-united-kingdom-voted-and-why/

I'll stop posting now, sorry for cluttering the thread!

BTW, I do think Corbyn could have done more.
Would it have made much difference if he had? Would more Labour voters have voted for remain, just because Corbyn told them to?
I don't know.
The result was close enough that the remain could have won if even a small proportion of voters had changed their mind, or if a small proportion of non-voters had been mobilised for remain. But I don't think that Corbyn should shoulder all the blame.

Graph of Leave/remain votes by how they voted in the last GE. (From Lord Ashcroft poll)
Comparison of media appearances by politicians.
uk.businessinsider.com/theresa-mays-remain-campaigning-worse-than-corbyn-2016-9

Maybe my feeling is wrong. I'd like to see the stats.

A greater proportion of Labour voters voted remain, so maybe they did do a better job of mobilising their supporters than Cameron!

This is my point sort of. I would have expected the Tory voters to be massively divided in the referendum in the same way their senior people were. But if Labour was supposedly pro-EU, then you would have thought/hoped they would be able to get their message over to their supporters such that a huge majority voted to remain.

And why did Cameron, Boris and Farage get the coverage? Because Corbyn wasn't doing or saying anything newsworthy?

But if the actual statistics are there perhaps your 'feeling' is wrong. People like the Prime Minister and Boris grabbed most of the headlines. And how many voters had their mind changed by evidence during that campaign? There was very little said of any substance.

Exploded I definitely agree with you regarding why the referendum was called. You may be right about the statistics, but I do feel that the 'Labour' voice was somewhat quiet during the campaign. With the Tories so divided it was a great opportunity for them to stand up and be counted as a united pro-EU party, but it didn't really come across imo.

But you could say that if Cameron had persuaded more Tory voters to vote remain (there were more Tory voters in 2015, after all) then we would have a different result. A greater proportion of Labour voters voted remain, so maybe they did do a better job of mobilising their supporters than Cameron!

-I agree that Corbyn's remain campaign was a bit lacklustre, but Cameron's was pretty shit too, tbh, and he was the one who promised the referendum in the first place. He was the one who went to Brussels to secure a "special deal" prior to the referendum, and he was the one who held the responsibility of selling this to the British public.

May was also officially part of the remain campaign, but she kept her head down even more than Corbyn! She even earned the nickname "Submarine".

Teen from memory I don't think Labour did fail to get the Remain vote out. I saw statistics that clarified it. And to be fair, the referendum happened to appease a troublesome bunch of MPs and hang on to votes that were going UKIP's way.

In my opinion, the referendum went the way it did because Labour failed to mobilise its supporters in favour of remain. The Tory party has always been divided over the EU. If Labour had got their act together and put the case to remain in a strong clear manner we would have had a different result.

My problem with Corbyn is not that he is left wing. I think economically what we have isn't working well enough. I don't think Corbyn has the answers but he at least admits the problems.

My problems with Corbyn are more about his instincts, organisational abilities and who he sees as his allies - from seeing him over his career in Parliament.

Surely the reason there are/were more strikes under a Tory Government are because they are the only ones willing to take on the unions and force modernisation / removal of restrictive practices?

• Secondary picketing.
• Closed strike ballots so people could vote without intimidation.

No one party is completely good or completely bad. People have to decide based on balance of policies and who they think can actually fulfil them.

I saw the other day that the Tories policies are very similar to BNP's a few years ago. The BNP!!!!
Labour veered sharply to the left under comrade Corbyn.

So, May is doing hugely well in the polls, and is expected to win a landslide because of large numbers, (including many on these Referendum threads) who can't vote Labour because of Corbyn, who is too left wing. May has espoused a racist agenda. Yet people try to convince me the Referendum wasn't about immigration.

I might believe them if I had seen an outpouring of anger from Leavers about the lack of money for the NHS. I haven't seen much - only apologists for austerity.

olliegarchy, I am not "demonising the older generation"! I am just pointing out how much is currently spent on pensions, and that a population pyramid becoming a population tower is problematic: A shrinking percentage of those of working age supporting an increasing number of retired people will cause funding issues.

The pensions figure includes both state pensions, and pensions paid to public sector employees. I think the triple lock etc is going- May has not promised to protect this, but I am not sure if they could legally reduce the public sector pensions?
I am quite worried about the private pension schemes in deficit too - in theory these should be protected by the private companies, but if the economy crashes and these companies go bust (think of BHS), who picks up the tab?

olliegarchy99:
The pensions offered to public sector employees now are much less generous than those in the past - like current private sector pensions, they very rarely guarantee a set amount: You pay into an investment scheme (often with employer top ups) and the pension you get at the end depends upon how well that investment has done.
So the pensions offered to tax payers now (immigrants and British born) should be much more affordable once these people retire.

BTW I hope this doesn't read like I am blaming pensioners or the soon to retire - its not their fault, and I don't want to see older people in financial difficulty. But I don't like seeing people working full time and still struggling to put a roof over their heads either, or disabled people struggling, or children in poverty either.... Wherever you make the cuts, people will suffer - there is only so much that can be saved with "efficiency savings".

nice
2 points :
The immigrants into this country will too get old and need pensions. My taxes and NI paid over 40 years funded the pensions of those who were of pensionable age.

The state pension is TAXED if it takes the recipient above the personal allowance
Pensions are a contributary (over a lifetime of working) 'benefit' unlike tax credits and housing benefit
sorry that was 3 points but I do find this demonising of the older generation very nasty.

^Darklane...I remember the three day week, the power cuts. If you've been born after you that you have no idea of the sheer misery that was.*
Yes. Life was pretty grim and we weren't a 'poor' family. The majority have such high standards of living now. And yes I know some families struggle to feed their children now before a pile in starts.
I won't vote Labour but actually Jeremy Corbyn is the only one who is consistent. If I was poor I would vote for him.

I agree Squishy. I've long argued that we cannot have any meaningful austerity cuts without looking at the elephant in the room which are pension payments.

Of course, no Tory government would ever dare do that since that's their core demographic.

The only way to sustain a viable NHS and pension system for the future is to allow more people in to work and pay taxes.

Stopping immigration with an aging population is a ticking timebomb.

Right now I'm literally aghast at the state of our political landscape. The Tories have lurched massively to the right and there's not much difference between them & UKIP. I saw the other day that the Tories policies are very similar to BNP's a few years ago. The BNP!!!!

Labour veered sharply to the left under comrade Corbyn. Popular with his own disciples but about as popular to the rest of the electorate as a fart in a lift. His latest policies sound like something out of the 70's. As for the extra bank holiday pledge. As my son (who is 15 put it). "It sounds like he's running for class president. 'Vote for me and I promise there will be sweets for everyone! And no homework!!!!' "

The Lib Dems were practically finished off at the last election but right now seem to be the only voice of moderation. Alas they are right now too small to really do anything effective.

Honestly this election more than ever, it seems like we're all stuck between the devil and the deep blue sea.

I got SNP first - most of the people I know on FB did too. Sadly we're not in Scotland

I got Lib Dems

In the past I did understand the argument that Tories were better for the economy.
They are not anymore!
All those who say that the NHS is a victim of its own success are partly correct, but it is also a victim of demographic changes.

And as for public spending: Do you have any idea how massive the pensions bill is? Both public service pensions and state pensions?
Many retired/ soon to retire are on final salary pension schemes - thee are very rarely offered to younger generations because they are massively unaffordable. Even many privately run FSP schemes are in deficit. The phrase "ticking time bomb" is overused, but applies here. It is expensive now, and is going to get even more expensive.
So: the cost of the NHS, social care, and pensions are all rising.
What's the hard right plan to fix it?
Reduce the number of working age people! Make it harder for foreign doctors and tax payers to come over here!
Fewer tax payers, supporting more elderly people! Then blame it on the poorest in society, and slash away at other sectors of public spending.

....Of course anyone who suggests that even a small amount of immigration has benefits is told that they "want to open the doors to completely unlimited immigration and flood the country with billions of illiterates".

Just out of interest, why are we so focused on one person in each party?