To feel angry at Tory voters?

[Dottodo]

DF has always voted Tory. He’s very anti immigration and we will never see each other’s POV.
DHs friends are all Tory voters and hate being with them as they are all racist, xenophobic & misogynistic.
Other Tory voters I know through work or extended family members are also xenophobic and casually racist.
I’ve spoken to friends about this and they agree that the Tory voters they personally know are also racist and xenophobic.
Why is this?
Me and DH lived abroad and as we've lived as ‘foreigners’, we don’t share their views.

The simple fact is, that being in the EU did not benefit enough people in the UK. It benefitted the wealthy at the expense of the less wealthy, and the highly educated at the expense of the less educated. Which is why Brexit won.

Indeed

Political analysits are already discussing how the 'left' has been overtaken by a typical right wing neoliberal ideology, the fact that MN was full on fan girling for Corbyn who was a life long Eurosceptic and think that a left wing position is to support the neolib ideal is people who are just tribal, you can see it with how the 'working class who's parents where down the mines' scoff at the red wall that went con.

There's certainly a lot of confusion nowadays from all sides.

Most people didn’t give much thought to the EU before 2015, which is a sign of it working reasonably well. There was some minor irritations, most of which was fake news generated by one B Johnson, but for the most part people just got on with their lives. But the Vote Leave lot ran an extremely slick and clever campaign persuading people that the country’s woes were the fault of the EU rather than the Tory government. You should see the video they produced showing the NHS treatment we’d all be getting if Leave won. It wasn’t showing the elderly on trolleys for three days and lines of ambulances backed up outside hospitals, that’s for sure.

This is the Tory government’s own report summary on how a hard Brexit would affect the nation. It’s simply not true that Brexit is helping the less well off and better educated. It suits the likes of Jacob Rees-Mogg that you should think so though - Brexit means he can continue not to pay full tax on his vast wealth. Tory party and its donors have done v v well. Ordinary people not so much.

i don't know if Brexit will help the less well off at least educated. But being in the EU didn't help them either. So you can hardly blame them for rolling the dice and voting Brexit.

I fear we are going to see that being in the EU did help them, as they will be bearing the costs of leaving along with everyone else, but less able to do so. The government was told time and time again that leaving would hurt the poorest hardest and first.
The Tories have done a great job of deflecting their culpability onto the EU. It’s not so long since they turned down millions of pounds worth of aid for food banks from the EU.

I don’t blame them for voting Brexit. I blame those who conned them.

Turning down EU help.

It’s not so long since they turned down millions of pounds worth of aid for food banks from the EU.

Do you know the ins and outs of why funding could have been turned down? Same with roads and infrastructure, it's a bit naïve to believe that billions were up for grabs and we just said 'no thanks' (whilst being major contributors).

Anyway, the main concern for a lot of voters was FOM, and sovereignty. The drawbacks of being in the EU of those two elements were tangible for most people in one way or another. And people voted accordingly.

Maybe as a nation we culturally cannot function effectively as part of a wider union. It's not in our DNA. We need to be in control. Why not move on and build on the opportunities that this new era will bring along?

I’ve read a few articles about it where Cameron claimed he’’d rather manage it himself which, of course, meant that the food banks didn’t get the money. It’s a bit like Cornwall being promised that Westminster would give them the same level of funding as there was from the EU until the gvnmt turned round and said ‘oh, sorry, no.’ It’s one of the poorest regions of Northern Europe let alone the UK.
i don’t buy the argumenypt about how it’s not part of our DNA to belong. It worked pretty well for the best part of forty years until the EU wanted to clamp down on tax havens. The following week 100 Tory MPs wrote to Cameron to demand action and here we are.
it would be much easier to move on and embrace the benefits if somebody could identify them.

Height mostly. There's not actually that much difference - only a foot between UK rolling stock and a TGV Duplex but if you're going to collide with a bridge, the result is the same whether it's a foot or a yard. Ceilings on TGV Duplexes are pretty tight so knock six inches off of each floor and I'll just be glad not to be 6 feet tall. They did try double decked trains in the UK but it was absurdly cramped.

UK railways were the first in the world and were built to fit the small steam locomotives of the day. Therefore Network Rail limits the height of rolling stock to 13'1". European loading gauges were agreed at a minimum of 14'1" in 1913 and France had to do a lot of work to improve its infrastructure to match the standards set by the Kaiserreich, but labour was cheap then. The UK wasn't party to the Berne Convention - it had no need to be as apart from a handful of vehicles that used the ferries, nothing from the continent would ever enter the UK until the Channel Tunnel was built in 1994.

Could we improve the loading gauge of our existing lines? In short it would cost a fortune. In order to install electric wires on the Great Western Main Line, Network Rail has spent a considerable sum of money raising bridges and lowering tunnels in order to fit electric wires in and maintain the 13'1" clearance (bear in mind that you have to keep the wires a safe distance from both structures and the roof of the train otherwise it'll arc). The UK is a very crowded country so you've got more bridges to do.

Any engineering work done has to fit around existing traffic. Everyone hates replacement buses, imagine having the things every weekend until further notice. In 1998 Railtrack started the West Coast Main Line Route Modernisation. After many overruns the project was finally finished (after being descoped) in 2009. The cost had gone from £2.5bn to £14.5bn in four years (2002 prices), driving Railtrack into liquidation as it went. That was for a project that yielded a fraction of the capacity that HS2 offers.

Adding extra lines to the existing route won't work either. The WCML wiggles it's way through the country, having to avoid the country estates of influential 1837 landowners. Development has been built right up to the route, so you'd still have to demolish loads of houses. You'd still have to rebuild Euston and demolish the same amount of Camden to accommodate it.

Just to illustrate how much capacity the project gains, there will be room for 13,300 commuters and 21,600 long-distance travellers out of Euston per hour. That compares with 5,500 commuters and 5,800 long-distance travellers now. It also releases some capacity out of St Pancras and King's Cross. You'd need to build two motorways to shift that number of people (just think what sort of land take that would be).

Dedraigcoch I thought my father's train knowledge was unbeatable. He wore his Navy uniform to blag his way into various train sheds in his 20s. Apparently Crewe was the mecca but Cricklewood sheds had some rare trains.

Anyway, you win. That's some detailed train expertise! I know capacity is for existing demand but I wonder if it's chicken and egg to the extent that expanding capacity reduces prices and is therefore utilised.

Sorry, just realised I've made an unfortunate misspelling of your username. Apologies.

i don’t buy the argument about how it’s not part of our DNA to belong. It worked pretty well for the best part of forty years until the EU wanted to clamp down on tax havens. The following week 100 Tory MPs wrote to Cameron to demand action and here we are

But that's the thing, isn't it. These imposed central rules by unelected representatives seem to work, until they no longer do.

See my example about Dutch farmers above. There's always a tipping point when a national government is forced to take a measure that will disadvantage its own for 'the grater good'. These measures are usually imposed by global lobby groups with their own financial motives -climate change, a move to full cashless, etc. It could be anything really.

Yet when posters point out that Brexit was voted for by the poor and less well educated, they are lambasted.

Interesting that Truss was a keen remainer but is now a ardent leaver, highly unusually in RL.

Wonder if she'll change back.

the Dutch farming industry is one of the highest producers of pollutants in the EU. There needs to be drastic change. I'm Dutch (living in the UK), but I refuse to buy Dutch meat because of the low (EU minimum) welfare standards applied - the intensive farming methods used are incredibly bad for the environment. We can argue about the methods, but those farmers need to make changes for the sake of the planet and so far they have been completely recalcitrant. I'm with the EU on this one. We need to rear higher welfare meat and eat a hell of a lot less of it

These farmers are at risk of losing everything and becoming destitute. Many have explained that they have proposed valid alternatives to improve methods but the government is not listening (presumably they have their hands tied?)

It's understandable that if you support the green agenda you will be with the EU on this one. But there will come a time when central policies will disadvantage you personally or will put your livelihood at risk. Perhaps then you will understand what others are going through and even why they could have voted for Brexit.

Wonder if she'll change back

That would be political suicide.

Also it's likely in the meantime the EU will mess it up with something (think vaccines, etc) and we will be glad we are not in the think of it

yep. She won’t change back even Starmer backs Brexit and it’s not his policy, and iirc he was a remainer

Even he knows the electorate voted and he has to respect outcome.

Things will change in EU, Italy is a good example of shifts and Germany needs energy supply from threatening Russia

Vaccines? oft repeated.

The UK rushed AZ, which then was withdrawn for younger ages, here in UK and elsewhere - we then slowed, Pfizer proved to be more effective but the EU had far more and then caught back up with UK, meanwhile we slowed as difficulties getting Pfizer etc.

..and it was EU funding over many years, that enabled the Jenner Institute to fund many new and exciting vaccine developments... which then gave them the background to bring forward AZ so quickly.

EU though seemed to use the problems of AZ for political purposes, which was unforgiveable, yes be cautious but keep the politics out of it.

We then had several complete shambles on LDs with the new waves, personally, i don't think many countries did particularly well but this idea that the UK was some sort of world leader, is rubbish, its just been spun that way.

It also appears our health services have performed particularly badly and are struggling to recover and having just used France's AE no, its not "all countries" again just spin.

Waiting lists here are shocking.

Waiting lists here are shocking

The NHS absolutely needs to be prioritised

I wouldn't be so concerned with Italy or Germany, i'd be more worried about why the Tories are blaming everyone but themselves for the mess we are in.

The latest being the BoE, really, a few weeks ago, they were praising the guy... now he's an incompetent & BoE needs reform.

On target for the highest inflation of any of our comparable competitors.

It’s weird people think Truss will revert when you’ve got the leader of the opposition making statements on staying with Brexit it’s fair to say that ship has sailed.

I don’t find your point about Dutch farmers persuasive at all for the reasons that the Dutch poster advanced to you.
And this rhetoric of ‘unelected’ EU is also false and misleading for the reasons a previous pister explained.

Agree but its not.

Regional pay bodies (that wont be dropped according to ReesMogg) recruiting from outside of Europe & lowering entry language requirements.

Inflation & energy costs will destroy any increase in funding and if Truss gets in, then they lose billions in funding, as Truss has no idea for replacing the funding the NI rise will give it.

Reform yes but we need to get on top of the waiting lists & staffing first.

She once wanted to abolish the Monarchy and encouraged UK citizens to go and fight in Ukraine.

..and if you read what i wrote "I wonder if she will change back?"

I think my post has been "misinterpreted"