if the 12bn welfare cuts were released pre-election the result would have been different?

[Toffeelatteplease]

I spoiled my ballot. As a lone parent to two "not working" as caring for a son with special needs, I was pretty sure we would be hit hard by a conservative government.

As it happens no change. except it probably will be harder to get DS the therapy and help and support at school because sadly I think all his front line care providers will be amongst the worse hit.

However I can think of a few very vocal conservative voters who I think are probably hit quite hard. I found the why should we support those who can't support themselves rhetoric very difficult and I "lost" a few friends in the year run up to the election.

AIBU to wonder whether the divide and conquer rhetoric led a lot of people to think that the cuts wouldn't hit them when they were going to, and had they known to wonder whether the election result might have been different

I think this budget has benefitted a lot of people too, and those people are natural tory voters (pensioners, higher rate tax payers, self employed.)

Yes but it was obvious changes were coming. We are going to be hugely affected.

The well paid are going to be better off.

That bastard Ian Duncan Smith has no idea about living on a low income.

Same as poppy, I think it's mostly Tory voters who have benefitted- at least it is amongst the people I know.

As an under 25 student who is dependent on tax credits it's not been great for me but I never expected it to be.

DH and I have both been hit hard but I would still have voted conservative. It's not a surprise though and I don't mind paying more to get our country back in the black. The majority of people have been hit, be it WTC, CTC, an 8ish% increase to 38% on taxes related to dividends, non doms, taxes relating to pensions for high earners etc. and more.

This reminds me of the banking crash in 2008. Private sector people suddenly had their incomes slashed or went into work to find they no longer had a job. No pay rises, in many cases wages went down whilst the public sector and benefit claimants were safe.

Over time the public sector jobs were affected. Pensions were cu, final salary pensions phased out, pay rises frozen. Now sadly it's the time for the benefit claimants to be affected. I just wish there was a safety net for those who are going to really struggle to eat.

I have a vocal Tory voter on my Facebook who was very happy with the budget...

They will be affected negatively though as although I don't know their salary, they're in social housing - so they're either going to lose a fair amount of tax credits or have a huge rent increase...or if they're on over 30k both at once.

So I can only assume they're ok with that...or that they haven't actually realised what the tax credit implications are as many seem not to have.

I did have a sneaky smile at my hideous ex boss who has a small business alongside her equally hideous husband. They played the system beautifully with dividends and crappy wages whilst encouraging their workers to be self employed until legally they found out they had to actually employ them.

I am hoping this change with dividend payments and new living wage as her clasping her pearls to her chest and screaming about still being able to afford their two Mercs.

I know I'm a cow but fuck me they were the worst people I ever ever worked for.

Maybe.

But of course Labour (who also said there would need to be more unspecified cuts) would have needed to put forward their agenda. And if there was a straight comparison of the two cuts agendas then perhaps the other would have gathered more support.

But as the Labour versionwasn't put forward during the election, and won't need to exist now, we'll never hear it. So cannot assess if it would have been election winning if known.

Some very thought provoking responses. Yes I do wonder how many people have not realised the upshot. I have had a few people message me to ask if I was ok. I have explained the small print and they were surprised. I can well imaging the same might apply to those who thought they wouldn't be hit but are

at Sebs Mummy - yes I agree. It also makes it somewhat less like that the ex will go back to being employed on less then minimum wage by "his wifes firm" who paid out large dividends.

How very true Auntie Stella - I still think Lib dems proposals were better

What is the point of spoiling your ballot? It doesn't make any statement as it is just disregarded.

I think there will be some very happy people and there will be some very unhappy people. Don't know if it would have changed the outcome of the election. Everyone knew they wouldn't say where the 12bn cuts were coming from. The Conservative mantra of vote for Labour, get SNP was the most constant part of the Conservatives spiel.

"What is the point of spoiling your ballot? It doesn't make any statement as it is just disregarded."

They're counted separately...so a spoiled ballot is counted as someone who is engaged enough to turn out, but didn't want to vote for anyone available, so a lost vote that could be won over next time rather than someone who just doesn't bother to vote.

It's not hugely influential, but it is a better choice (in terms of getting your choice across) than just not voting at all.

If there was a none of the above I would have done that. I wanted to make it clear I had engaged with the voting process but didn't feel any deserved my vote. I am in a traditionally conservative area but with a major UKIP influence which made tactical voting marginally more unpalatable. There was very little to choose from

I totally agree about the vote labour get SNP mantra having an impact

By saying it's not hugely influential, there is an implication that there is some influence in the election taking place. There is no influence at all in electing the new government by spoiling your ballot.

They don't get counted towards the election results. Just as the amount of ballot papers that have to be disregarded.

I don't know if political parties are any more interested in people who spoil their votes than those who don't turn up because they say there is no one they want to vote for. Is the end result not the same?

No, it has no bearing on who is elected...but yes they are looked at by candidates and other people and things like a higher than normal amount of them is something political parties are concerned with.

So no, not quite the same end result as not turning out.

I think a lot of "secret" Tory voters would have thought twice. I know a lot of couples who get CTC (although not the max) who are in 20-30K jobs and will now be hit by the CTC withdrawal thresholds which won't be compensated by the rise in tax thresholds.Their DC will also not get any level of grant for uni. They believed David about supporting "hard working families" but are not pleased today.

I don't think so. Maybe if the huge amount of people that didn't vote, actually had.

The problem with labour wasn't that they were going to make cuts. It was that no one trusted them. Or at least in my circle. Labour were almost an unknown entity. No one trust their plan or their words.

I think they would have done similar to the Tories have here. But I think the minimum wage would have been £8 instead of the eventual £9.

They believed David about supporting "hard working families" but are not pleased today

Sadly more fool them then.

I know people who voted Tory with no understanding of their manifesto and are now bleating that ct will be cut. I have never voted Tory, and never will, but I forsaw this would happen, what do people expect from a right wing party? I think the result may have been different if
A) all low income earners had voted
And
B) voters had read manifestos and remembered what life was like under the last tory government.

I'm very much not a Tory voter but will benefit. Essentially it's a budget to benefit people who are over 25, have no dependents or, if they do, earn the average and above salaries. I'd never have voted for it, even knowing that I'd benefit. I work in the social housing sector, so many of our tenants are going to be very affected.

I do think it demonstrates how close to the bone many households are living, either through necessity because of high living costs or lack of foresight - the tax credit losses many posters on other threads have reported equate to an average loss of around £100 - £150 a month: the sort of money which households could "lose" through higher outgoings if, for example, interest rate rises were to increase mortgage repayment amounts, or if higher inflation pushed prices up. I think it's shocking that many posters believe they will be "screwed" or "flung into poverty" over £100 - £150 a month.

I think a lot of people voted Tory thinking the benefit cuts would only be to those feckless people with 10 kids and no one working. All that "rewarding hard working families" guff led them to believe they wouldn't be affected. And now they are and they are a bit shocked.

UKIP or the greens have more of a chance than labour where I am. I thought labour have been very poor opposition and still look completely lost. I voted lib dem as whilst they let me down in the colalition they at least softened the Tories, but that was a waste. Labour need to get their act together and they need to do it quickly. Whilst strongholds exist not all votes are equal.

I feel low income families have been unfair shafted in lots of directions. They have lost their child tax credits and if a low income SAHM gets a job then it will push her family over the 30K threshold and they will have to pay market rates on their council house.

There is no doult that this is a budget for wealthy pensioners whose lives go totally untouched.

It's as I expected, almost. The non dom thing was a surprise, I must have missed that pledge in the run-up to the election.

There may be some voter remorse - the surveys will be out soon, from yougov etc, so we shall see.

I agree coffee; the rhetoric will have backfired on many.

I'm not gloating though like so many Tory voters did after the election. I don't wish to see anyone's life made harder. I hope at least some of those who voted for Dave & Gideon to run our country understand now that the 'strivers vs. skivers' rubbish helps no-one. And that 'hard-working families' doesn't mean what a lot of people think it means...

www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/jul/07/corporate-welfare-a-93bn-handshake

The government hands business £93 billion in rebates, location costs etc as well as subsidising wages with CTC. The main companies that benefit are the tax avoiding ones as well. It beggars belief that they have to penalise the ordinary person to make £12 bn cuts. They keep saying they "have " tomake these cuts but there is no "have to" about it they choose where to pare - what about Trident, weapons bill, tax avoidance etc

The Tories have paid a good game of divide and rule. skivers vs strivers. private renters vs public housing vs mortgage holders etc. All of us cut to the limit scrapping with each other about "fairness" while the rich get richer