Long-standing Conservative voters thread

[Katypp]

Any one else who has - up to this point at least - been a Tory voter?
I have voted Conservative at every national election (I am late 50s). This one is probably the most likely to change. Purely because I think new blood would be a good idea. I live in a very Labour area and have never shared my colours with anyone from being in my early 20s.
Given the fact that the Tories usually win, I suspect there are a lot like me.
I know it's a big ask, but I hope thar this might be a sensible thread for other natural Tory voters to discuss the election and not be called names and shouted down like we are on every other thread.
If you are a Labour voter, please don't hijack the thread and tell us how wrong we are. There is free speech in the UK and we are just as entitled to hold our opinion as you are to hold yours.

@AnnieSnap , yes we agree on many of the points you raise. Let me repeat that I want to see a Conservative Party that is determined to 'do the right thing' not just win.
I see truculence on both sides of the Railway dispute. Partly because our managers are not well trained. There is a skills and awareness deficit in the boardrooms of the UK.
What a hell it would be if we had a Reform/Tory v Green/Activist/Labour. It would be a difficult life for any midground Party.

Who will you vote for in this election?

I still don't know, We are in a new constituency, 4 Candidates have no experience of anything. The old constituency wasn't long established so few loyalties or habits. LibDem are favorites by a big %age, weak Labour.
Probably New-to-Politics Tory will get my X.
He lives in the area is in his 40s I am more interested to see if he stays on and gets involved. He is already campaigning on a eco project, I have sympathy with his views on that.
And You?

You see it's comments like the last one on this post that turn me off Labour. I can't see how anyone sensible could possibly think that anyone would go into politics just to make their friends richer. Take all the stress, finger pointing and pressure so they can make their friends richer. Why would they?
It's one of those knee-jerk, silly things people say (I hope) without thinking through that makes me think I don't want to be associated with the type of person Labour attracts in the same way as I would not want to associated with the type of person Reform attracts.
I accept that people may have benefited from Tory policies but it's the implication Tory MPs have an agenda of keeping the poor down, making their friends richer, deliberately destroying the NHS and all of the other simplistic and infantile stuff posted day-in, day-out which is a real turn-off to me.
That said, this election betting may well be the straw that breaks the camel's back for me at tjus election.

This is where I don't think the British public is sufficiently looking outside our borders to see this is a trend in numerous European countries due to the Russian threat where they are either discussing re-introducing it, introducing it or expanding it.

@Katypp so do you genuinely think that this incarnation of the Tory party at Westminster at least do not have an agenda of keeping the poor down and enriching their mates? Do you really think that they have not wilfully run down the NHS? Do you really not think that they have a powerful streak of performative cruelty? I'm not talking about the average Tory in the street, the one who would love the One Nation Tories back, I'm talking about the likes of Robert Jenrick who ordered cheerful murals painted over in an asylum centre. There's nothing simplistic about pointing out the actual, factual things that this Tory government have done which are not about constructively addressing the issues the UK faces, but are instead about being seen to appease the people in their party who thrive on loathing others.

I disagree - I think if the National Service offering were similar to what is available in Finland and Sweden, people would support it no matter what their age. I would.

But the offering is nothing like that. It's exploitative and it's about demonising young people and pretending they owe us something, when in fact the reverse it true.

It used to be mandatory in Sweden, think Finland too. Then they stopped the requirement to do national service altogether before reintroducing a 'softer' version more recently.

I have not read the policy in detail but I don't think you could go for a soft-style voluntary set up from not having it be compulsory like in Scandinavia. But I think the comms around it has been pretty awful.

But, main point was that for many of the things we discuss now, these are issues discussed across Europe (and beyond), so not just national, e.g issues after Covid, the war, increased taxes, interest rates etc.

I don't think the current Tories have dealt with all of these issues well (and there seems to be a rotten core though, ironically, I think Rishi is probably a decent guy).

No I don't think that at all. Has it happened? Maybe. Was it deliberate? I don't think so.

Labour

I suppose what I'm saying is that some of the issues we have faced (Covid, war etc etc) are not not down to Tories. Cameron obviously expected people to be sensible and vote for Remain, that was a real misstep. Brexit was a shit show. They need to regroup and get rid of the rotten core but also worried about some of Labour's front benchers having been very inconsistent, thinking those who backed Corbyn. Rachel Reeves seems OK in this regard.

I have not read the policy in detail but I don't think you could go for a soft-style voluntary set up from not having it be compulsory like in Scandinavia. But I think the comms around it has been pretty awful.

The problems go far, far deeper than that. You simply can't compare what the Tories are offering and what the setup is in Finland and Sweden. The Tory offering is offering 25 days with the military (yes, that one has been thoroughly watered down) or one weekend a month for a year doing scut work in care homes, hospitals etc. - so for the vast majority there would be zero benefit in terms of learning new skills and ending up being a useful military force. It would be unpaid and at the end of it there would be no reward at all. Contrast that with the Scandinavian offering, which is about learning real skills, payment and waiving of university tuition fees at the end.

The Tories need to learn that you can't steal young people's futures and then force them to give you something for nothing.

No I don't think that at all. Has it happened? Maybe. Was it deliberate? I don't think so.

@Katypp I despair. I just despair. What Robert Jenrick did happened. There's no maybe about it. It was extensively documented in the media. It achieved nothing useful in reducing the number of asylum seekers in small boats, it was just cruel gesture politics. If you can't accept that it happened and condemn it, then you are not the Tory I thought you were.

Same with the Carers' Allowance scandal. The DWP knew overpayments were happening because they had monitoring systems telling them so. And yet they did nothing to bring in changes that would have prevented people owing thousands. They were either completely incompetent or completely cruel - which of those two options do you find acceptable? (Hint: there is a correct answer. It's 'Neither').

And then there's Windrush, Rwanda, Lockdown breaches, Brexit - the list is endless. So again: Incompetence or wilful cruelty?

Anyone who makes excuses for this shitshow of a government is part of the problem, and I'm sorry. I really thought you were better than that, and seeing what you write just makes me lose all hope of ever having a Conservative party I can respect again.

I have not said those things didn't happen and I have not made excuses.
What I take exception to is the constant narrative that the Tories are ONLY interested inn helping out their rich mates and deliberately implement policies to 'keep the poor down'.
There have been some absolute disasters during the last 14 years - and I have not made excuses anywhere for them - but I think to state that all of these were bacause the Government had a starting point of helping their rich friends or stamping on the poor is ridiculous, naive and very childish.
It's that I am objecting to and I can't see why you would think otherwise from my post.

That's fair enough, but if you look at the years since 2019 when Boris Johnson took over, it's very difficult to think otherwise. I agree with you that the Tories have not been the way they are now for the full 14 years - they wouldn't have been reelected so often if they had been - but since 2019, the rot has accelerated at lightning speed. And the decent Tories allowed it to happen. Time and time again, the ever dwindling group of One Nation Tories voted for things that made matters worse and worse. Even though they knew better - must have known better - they chose to put party before country every single time.

That is unforgivable.

And right now, there really isn't a lot of evidence against the position that the people currently running the country are only in it for themselves.

Tis article by the excellent journalist Andrew Rawnsley i think sums up Sunak/Tories predicament and what most voters feel.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/article/2024/jun/23/sleazy-inept-and-unbelievable-this-sorry-sunak-campaign-sums-up-the-tory-years

As a reluctant voter this election, I'd like to spoil my ballot, but instead I shall drive home in time to cast it. I really don't know how I want to vote. The labour candidate is completely parachuted in. The Tory candidate has failed to make any mark for 14 years. The LibDem is nice but dim, and the most likely success. And at a national level, I don't dislike either Starmer or Sunak, who are both equally anodyne. In 2019, I voted against Corbyn. but this time? I don't actively like any of the messages.

pointythings
It would be unpaid and at the end of it there would be no reward at all. Contrast that with the Scandinavian offering, which is about learning real skills, payment and waiving of university tuition fees at the end.

In fact Sunak did mention rewards/incentives in his Question Time slot the other day (he mentioned looking at what other countries offer).

In the Question Time slot? That's back of fag packet stuff. If there were going to be rewards, why wasn't that mentioned on day 1?

I didn’t hear him mention rewards. He did mention penalties for refuseniks like removing driving licences.

He said something about financial incentives, though Fiona Bruce thought he meant financial punishments!

Why were driving licences mentioned then? He definitely said something about them when asked what would happen to people who refused.

I'm staying a party member so I can vote in the next leadership election. Hopefully there will be a reasonable candidate, not just the far right nutters. But I won't be voting for them in the GE. It's just time to change - 13/14 years is just the shelflife of a government. I don't think much of Starmer and couldn't bring myself to vote labour anyway. I remember the last Labour government thanks - cronyism, ridiculous NHS targets that led to ambulances queuing outside A&E to avoid the clock starting etc. Also I'm not sure I can forgive Labour for blocking a decent Brexit agreement on principle OR for scuppering (a frankly progressive) social care plan by calling it a Death Tax (since when was preserving inheritances a left-wing cause?). Add to that some frankly unpleasant anti-woman rhetoric (hoarding rights like dinosaurs?) and I just fail to see the appeal. Libdems have lost the plot and seem to be campaigning locally solely on the claim they are the only party who can beat the tories. Not sure "tactical voting" is really working for us as a country. So it looks like the SDP for me, who seem like an interesting mix. Doubt they will win, but maybe it's good to vote for the party that most fits your views rather than trying to play some GTTO game by endorsing anyone with any policies whatever they are.

ridiculous NHS targets that led to ambulances queuing outside A&E to avoid the clock starting etc.

That never happened in the hospital where I worked and we had a steady 98/99% compliance with targets too.

Why have you singled out the Conservatives as being most at fault for The Post Office/Fujitsu problems?

As far as I am aware the computer system was rolled out under Labour (1998) despite warnings of initial glitches, many (most?) of the prosecutions happened under Labour, three of the ministers involved during the coalition government were Lib Dem MPs etc.

Failure to strengthen legislation so that regulators could investigate and prosecute the directors. It was all blatant cronyism,

So why didn't the last Labour government strengthen legislation/the regulator?

Thames Water is mentioned in this EU court ruling (2012) - the dates clearly covering the Labour government as well;

https://www.iema.net/articles/uk-faces-massive-fines-over-sewage-failures#:~:text=The%20Court%20of%20Justice%20of,fines%20from%20the%20European%20Commission.