to wonder why people vote Labour, Tory or Lib Dem?

[michaelatipton]

Lots of threads on here asking why people voted UKIP. I didn't vote because I think all the parties are rubbish and none of them represent what I believe in but I would like to ask people who voted Labour, Tory or Lib Dem why they voted the way they did, whether it was policies and if so what specific policies of the Lab/Tory/Lib Dem party appeal over other parties and if it wasn't for policies then why? Thank you.

You pose a good question OP. I'm pretty pro-Europe myself and could never vote UKIP for lots of reasons, but I totally understand why others did, given the complete shambles that the main 3 parties are in.

I could never vote for the Tories because Cameron is a twat and stands for nothing (except what he thinks the electorate wants to hear). I'm a natural labour voter, but I can't vote for the party under Milliband because he's is an utterly implausible leader and I've no faith any of them to improve our economic prospects.

In the end I voted for the Lib Dems out of … I don't know … sheer desperation? Even though they are more or less finished as a party.

The lack of leadership or vision is thoroughly depressing.

still believe that the less well off should at least attempt to help themselves rather than expecting others who work harder to bail them out. so couldn't vote labour

also think lib dems are a load of fruitcakes - renaging on the arrangment to make boundaries more representative of voters (just cause they lost the vote for proportional rep) and also disagreeing with tution fees and then agreeing for them to be raised to 9k. why is loads of the education budget paying for free school lunches for rich families rather than being spent on education?

Tucsongirl I wouldn't necessarily have a problem with a bedroom tax if there were appropriately-sized properties for people to downsize to available and if people who needed their own bedrooms due to being disabled were exempt but neither of those things are true. I don't think most people believe the shambolic way the bedroom tax has been implemented has been a good thing.

I voted green in the euro elections, but labour in our local elections. I did so because out of a choice of labour, conservative, lib dem and ukip (which is all I had to choose from) labour seemed the least awful. The basic principles that should underlie the Labour Party are largely what I would support but the party seems to have lost it's way somewhat.

I voted Labour.

Could've written IndiansInTheLobby's post, apart from the single parent bit, which is only going to apply if dh EVER votes Lib Dem again....

(/notreally - it's up to him.)

Every political party goes through better and worse phases, depending on the leadership - in Labour's case, the nadir was Tony Blair's government. (To be fair to the electorate, many were deceived in him - he didn't show his true colours until it was too late.) The same goes for the Conservatives - at times (like the present), they are even more repellent than at others.

However, by and large, over the long term, Labour values, aspirations and policies are very different from Conservatives and that is why I will stick with them.

The reality doesn't match up to what they say though. So many people keep going on about Labour being the party of equality and niceness when they proved to be anything but between 1997-2010.

Labour - have been a party member since 1984 - I saw a lot of the good they did when last in power - the benefit to the young people I support - the decent schools, the NMW, the future jobs fund, EMA, CTC, WTC etc

I also agree with them on education, public sector services, the bedroom tax, the cap on fuel bills, the possible renationalisation of parts of the rail network etc

I voted and continue to vote Labour as I believe in the importance of welfare benefits for low income families, initiatives like sure start which promote a better start for children, a general attempt to achieve more social equality and reduce poverty including higher minimum wage. I support unionisation. I saw the NHS improve under labour and I saw the immediate deterioration under the current government.

Labour don't entirely reflect my political views (and I can't stand Ed Miliband) but of the major parties I prefer their approach and policies to others and I have decided rather than whinging about the policies that don't align with mine I will join the party and attempt to change them from the inside. Surely that is the only approach if a party does not represent you fully but is the closest you can get.

sandberry - by 'achieve social equality and reduce poverty' i assume you mean higher earners should pay more tax to help lower earners. could you explain to me why my husband should subsidise his brother? And in a few years my oldest son subsidise his younger brother? they have all had the same opportunities but some of them worked hard at school, dhave one unpleaseant work experience and then taken on responsible jobs often away from home, whereas the poorer ones have just taken the easy option with as little effort as possible involved?

I think everyone is entitled to a basic standard of living and social inequality harms everyone in society. In less equal societies crime is higher, healthcare costs are higher, high income families also pay out more for basic services like childcare and transport because people paying individually rather than collectively increases costs and decreases quality for most.

In addition children raised in poverty have poorer educational outcomes, health outcomes and society deteriorates for years to come, we will be paying for our recent choice to increase inequality for years and years to come. This is not about individual 'fairness', it is about the collective good.

Personally I would choose to reduce poverty by resources that benefit many, increase employment opportunities and disproportionately impact lower income families.

So for example I would have nationalised subsidised childcare and subsidised transport, probably an increase in social housing. However I am not opposed to individual benefits if they increase the goal of reducing social inequality because of the long term benefit of this to everyone.

Also most of the low earners I know work hard, made a lot of effort and still are poorly paid. Many of them didn't have the same opportunities as others. They were unable to access adequate education, healthcare or family life. Let's not pretend higher earners work harder, it is a fallacy pedaled by conservatives (small c deliberate)

thanks sandberry - most of your thread makes a lot of sense despite the fact we vote for different parties. i also agree with your sentiments about good quality eduation, healthcare and family life.

in my family though, the higher earners work harder and have throughout their lives than the lower earners - and all of them have had the same basic opportunities - ie same parents and schools for at least the start of their education.

A lot of voters seem to make their choice baed on " what will financially benefit me and my family" rather than "what is best for society as a whole - not exclusively financially"

I agree that may be the case in many families, people may make different choices for many reasons. I'm not arguing for everyone having a perfectly equal standard of living. I doubt it's possible and I'm not sure whether it's desirable but I think the gap should be narrowed through policies which promote greater social equality.

I also think for me the greater good outweighs the individual fairness argument. It definitely isn't fair that for example someone who is healthy gets to choose not to work, gets social housing and has 10 children or whatever while someone else works 12 hours a day, struggles with high rents and can only afford one child but people who are feckless rather than unlucky are the minority and in order to ensure the best outcomes for everyone, we should subsidise the feckless, the unlucky and the higher earners. It might not be fair but it is right.

Actually I think the reason the political climate is going the way it is is (ie increase in UKIP votes) is because people are encouraged to focus on the individual fairness argument and compare what they get to what someone else gets and blame others for their own circumstances rather than looking at the overall good of society.

Everything that Bettercallsaul1 said. I've always voted Labour, they're the party that is closet to my beliefs. Hell would freeze over before I voted Tory or UKIP. In the last GE I considered voting Lib Dem as I was disillusioned with Labour, but decided against it in the end and voted Labour. My dad and sister both voted Lib Dem in the last GE after being lifelong Labour voters. They're both very sorry they did now, they feel as do many that the Lib Dems sold out their supporters for 5 minutes in power. My dad has said he will never vote again, my sister has reverted back to Labour.

'Welfare' is for animals and (perhaps) children. I prefer the term social security, which some older MNers might remember. It better expresses what a rich country like ours should be able to provide its citizens with when they fall upon hard times. Society and security, the antithesis of the modern Tory slash-and-burn, fuck-you-I'm-alright-Jack ethos. It took a long time, but I realised that the party which, among other things, created the NHS, brought in the Equal Pay Act and the National Minimum Wage is, for all its faults and sometimes catastophic errors, the only place I can call home.

I voted labour. I'm not particularly keen on Miliband and I don't think they fought a good campaign, but I do believe in social justice and I think they are the party that best represents my views.

I have voted lib dem in the past, though not at the last election. I would not consider voting for them again.

I would consider voting green, if I thought they had a reasonable chance of electoral success.

I would never vote Tory or UKIP. Their values and principles are fundamentally incompatible with my own.

I wish that the Labour Party would get its act together. I want to be inspired by them, but it's not happening at present. I am not at all surprised that they failed to make a bigger dent at this election, though I'm disgusted with how people chose to exercise their protest.

Melanie, where do you live, that Labour don't stand?, curious

I'm feeling pretty disgusted with those were too lazy, unopinionated or apathetic to vote, they need to realise they are responsible for UKIP's success.

I voted Snp. Would have voted greens if I were in england. I don't really get the popularity of the main parties either.

has anyone heard of the pirate party ive just found out they exist? misses point of thread

Labour because (a)you have to vote for something
(b)I've always voted Labour (c) Labour is the best option to spoil things for the SNP.

By ideology I'm probably now Conservative lite/liberal with a small "l".

In Scottish parliament elections I vote Labour in the first choice but have voted Conservative in the Holyrood list. That is because the way it works voting Labour twice if it's a safe seat can mean the second vote won't count and I want to vote against the SNP.

Basically in Westminster and Holyrood elections my main priority is who is more likely to make sure the SNP don't do well.

I would not vote for the Greens as their other policies are extreme and I would never vote for UKIP or the SNP.

After seeing and having to deal with the educational reforms that the Tories have whizzed through I wouldn't vote for them if they promised me the world. No chance.

Gove is dangerous and has no clue about children. An utter, utter prat.

The lib dems are weak.

Labour are weak with milliband as a leader but he won't be around forever. It's Labour for me.