Previous Tory voters

GrannyRose15

Why do we always have to argue our case? Sometimes it should be enough to state what it is. That way we get a rounded view of how people think. We don’t frighten anyone off. As I tried to say earlier I would have been interested to hear a variety of views on this thread that weren’t from the usual suspects. I think it would have been informative and instructional.

Well, you could just make a statement along the lines that you believed such and such, or that your opinion was this, that or the other.

But inevitably, those that disagree (with whatever it is), will naturally question you on your statement / belief. Surely, that's how debate develops?

Otherwise you will just have lots of comments giving an opinion, with no discussion on those opinions.

For example, I could say, "I think the rich should pay more tax". If no one is 'allowed' to question why I believe that's a good idea, it's not really going to be a very interesting discussion - is it?

I don't know - maybe that's what you prefer? Just to scroll down a 'list' of what people think / believe, without any context?

"Arguing" your case doesn't mean you / we have to actually argue by attacking the individual, just arguing your point in the sense that you 'debate' it... no?

Why do we always have to argue our case? Sometimes it should be enough to state what it is. That way we get a rounded view of how people think. We don’t frighten anyone off. As I tried to say earlier I would have been interested to hear a variety of views on this thread that weren’t from the usual suspects. I think it would have been informative and instructional.

Luckygirl3

It is simply about expressing differing views. That is not trashing. If you have a view then you should be prepared to justify that. Intelligent debate is just fine. If hearing someone expressing a different view is not something you are comfortable with, then not joining the political threads might feel better for you.

* If you have a view then you should be prepared to justify that.*

Not necessarily in my opinion. But it isnt going to happen on GN on the politics section, sadly.

If hearing someone expressing a different view is not something you are comfortable with, then not joining the political threads might feel better for you.

Depends how those views are expressed.
But again, cant see anything changing any time soon.

We can but try - and we should try.

M0nica

I am sorry, Maizie but I think we should be capable of rising above the vagaries of party leaders.

The 1980s, after the 1979 election were far worse, economically, socially and in every other way, and the following decades were equally contentious, but we still managed to be civilised and courteous in the early years of Gn and should still be capable of acting that way.

If the 2105 election was the first GE since to formation of Gnet, MOnica, then I'm not surprised that you were able to discuss the past in a 'civilised and courteous' way.

I joined Gnet round about the time of the Referendum when the 'vagaries' of one particular party leader were very much 'news' and became a very contentious topic over the next 3 or 4 years. Current affairs are far more difficult to always be considered in a detached way.

MaizieD

^Ths ended in 2015 with the first general election after GN was formed. The real nadir of political discussion was in the aftermath of jeremy Corbyn's election as leader of the Labour party, we had a sudden influx of new members with views far to the left of centre, who contributed and dominated every political thread, but contributed to little else. It almost seemed to be a planned influx.^

I think the change in tone was bound to happen, MOnica because a period of relative consensus and stability was ending with a new party leader not in the usual mould and the effects of austerity being increasingly felt.

Add to that the appalling and greatly divisive EU referendum in 2016 and the chances of 'open and friendly' debate dwindle to almost zero..

Subsequent events haven't done anything to restore consensus, have they?

Add to that the appalling and greatly divisive EU referendum in 2016 and the chances of 'open and friendly' debate dwindle to almost zero..

Too true.

IMO, the reason why we cannot have 'open' and friendly debate is because the referendum was not simply a choice between two differing sets of opinions held by ordinary citizens. In our already deeply-divided society, Leave or Remain became very much part of our personal identity. So an argument for or against wasn't simply a matter of a difference of opinion, it became an attack on the person.

The root cause of the clamour for a referendum was (a) Cameron's inability to square-up to the dissenters in his party - he hoped a resounding Remain vote would put them in their place so he wouldn't have to; and (b) individuals like JRM - ideologically and obsessively (I would say) driven against our membership, and (c) much of the general public's dissatisfaction with the effects of years of austerity which they believed were due to said membership and were encouraged by various bodies to believe so. Do we yet know the truth - have we untangled the domestic policies which caused economic misery from the policies of the EU which were or were not contributory?

I once got into 'trouble' with a poster who appears to post no longer for pointing out that in areas of deprivation, the benefits of our EU membership might not be too obvious to the inhabitants, so banging on about ERASMUS would mean very little to those who were faced with simply keeping body and soul together on a minimum wage. My point was that Remainers should've acknowledged this 'discrepancy' but I was informed that this was government's job, not ours (Remainers) to deal with. Sure - but government didn't and many Remainers haughtily dismissed the concerns of those less privileged who weren't part of the EU gravy-train, even though they might have benefited from certain regeneration funded by the EU. It wasn't enough to convince them that their best interests lay in remaining part of it.

Then along came BJ with his "get Brexit done" rallying cry - and the outcome was inevitable. And here we are, still divided and little has changed. And now we have two nasty wars which has caused further divisions and a cost-of-living crisis which shows little sign of abating any time soon.

And what we're doing is fighting each other instead of uniting and challenging the government. In times of crises, they are in charge regardless of what the crisis is and their involvement in it.

I don't know about anyone else, but I personally have little faith in either Sunak or Starmer, I don't believe either are addessing the major concerns of the electorate, I'm not even sure they comprehend them - and personally don't relate to them.

If they really did grasp the fears, worries and insecurities of the divided factions of the electorate - they'd both be unable to sleep at night because they'd be faced with an impossible task of trying to both acknowledge and address widely differing views and situations of a troubled nation. Neither look to me like they lose much sleep, they're just following party dogma, and whoever wins the next GE... we are still going to be in the same place we are now, still fighting and arguing because nothing much is going to change.

There's been grandiouse talk of 'healing the divisions' in the nation, mending the rift. Yes. Good. Right. But how do you do that without making major, structural changes - a sea-change? How do you do that without punishing the poor further by making even more spending cuts - and how do you protect those in the middle who've worked hard for the majority of their lives for what they've got and don't want to see that stealthily taken away from them? I have no idea, and I'm not paid to have any ideas anyway, but governments are, and they should be looking at ways to, at least, start to dealwith the divisions. Focusing on the country as a whole rather than their own personal ambitions would probably be a very good place from which to start.

I am sorry, Maizie but I think we should be capable of rising above the vagaries of party leaders.

The 1980s, after the 1979 election were far worse, economically, socially and in every other way, and the following decades were equally contentious, but we still managed to be civilised and courteous in the early years of Gn and should still be capable of acting that way.

Ths ended in 2015 with the first general election after GN was formed. The real nadir of political discussion was in the aftermath of jeremy Corbyn's election as leader of the Labour party, we had a sudden influx of new members with views far to the left of centre, who contributed and dominated every political thread, but contributed to little else. It almost seemed to be a planned influx.

I think the change in tone was bound to happen, MOnica because a period of relative consensus and stability was ending with a new party leader not in the usual mould and the effects of austerity being increasingly felt.

Add to that the appalling and greatly divisive EU referendum in 2016 and the chances of 'open and friendly' debate dwindle to almost zero..

Subsequent events haven't done anything to restore consensus, have they?

I have been on GN since weeks of it launching and in the early years political debate (with a small 'p') was more open and friendly and people from both sides did discuss policies in more detail and with more open minds. There were one or two people whose attitude was 'my party, right or wrong', but they were few.

Ths ended in 2015 with the first general election after GN was formed. The real nadir of political discussion was in the aftermath of jeremy Corbyn's election as leader of the Labour party, we had a sudden influx of new members with views far to the left of centre, who contributed and dominated every political thread, but contributed to little else. It almost seemed to be a planned influx.

Fortunately by COVID most had got bored and moved on and we moved to our present stage where we have a reasonable number of contributors from both sides of the political divide, although, still a left of centre preponderance.

I enjoy political threads, but try not to be personal, and avoid them when they do.

I agree Luckygirl. Unfortunately though, on occasions threads veer into personal attack mode rather than arguing about a principle or a point somebody has made, and that isn’t ever acceptable. This doesn’t just happen on political threads, but across the board.

It is simply about expressing differing views. That is not trashing. If you have a view then you should be prepared to justify that. Intelligent debate is just fine. If hearing someone expressing a different view is not something you are comfortable with, then not joining the political threads might feel better for you.

Luckygirl3

I ignore any unpleasantness.

I am not surprised that there is anti Conservative feeling on here. This Conservative government has let us down badly and brought parliamentary government into disrepute. We must expect people to be unhappy about that and to express that view on relevant threads.

But wasn’t this supposed to be a fact finding thread. People might be more ready to share their own views (and not
those of “others of their acquaintance” if they thought they could do just that without having to defend them. We all know the tropes. We all know things have gone wrong. We don’t all want our firmly held beliefs or our newly burgeoning allegiances trashed by posters who are well rehearsed in what to say.

To answer the question I am and always have been a Conservative voter. I am terribly disappointed by the lack of democracy within the party that I have witnessed over the last year. I believe that if Conservative MPs actually listened to the members of their own party then we would not have as many problems as we have today. I will not be voting for the Labour Party as I do not trust them to do what is right for the country on so many issues. Whether I vote Conservative or spoil my vote is still undecided. In any case as I live in a strongly Labour constituency it will make little difference to the outcome.

I ignore any unpleasantness.

I am not surprised that there is anti Conservative feeling on here. This Conservative government has let us down badly and brought parliamentary government into disrepute. We must expect people to be unhappy about that and to express that view on relevant threads.

I know one who left because of the insults, and another who very rarely posts for the same reason. I wasn’t on GN four years ago but the anti-Conservative culture has always been present since I joined, and the unpleasantness has certainly increased of late.

Odd that tory supporters are in the minority now. They were everywhere 4 years ago when Johnson won his 80 seat majority.

Some people’s idea of argument is to hurl insults, and Conservative supporters (or those who put their heads above the parapet) are very much in the minority here. I for one prefer to avoid the unpleasantness.

Germanshepherdsmum

Probably because we don’t want to be insulted.

If it's reasoned I don't see why it should lead to insults. It might be argued with, though...

Germanshepherdsmum:
I am entitled to courtesy from you, as are we all. It seems to be in short supply.

I think you will find I reply in the tone used to me. The sort of gaslighting entrapment that goes on is not to my liking and I am not bound by any of societies mores to accept it.

You and I have been able to have very reasonable conversations in the past. You are, as you keep telling us, an educated women, so you know exactly what you are doing.

It is only a sense of entitlement, as you have now said twice, that makes you think I should accept this. You are wrong. I am equal to the dustman and the Duke alike; we are all equal. Like all of us you need to earn people's good will, not expect it as a right.

I gave my views at the start of this thread.

I am currently politically homeless/floating voter.

How I vote depends on many things,

Will my constituency MP stand again, if not who will be standing for the two main parties?

What is in the Labour & Conservative Party Manifesto’s

Who are the likely front benchers for the two main parties

A big part of my decision will be building regulations, benefit system/working wage and the tax burden.

As for the NHS and Education I haven’t so far seen any discernible difference between the two main parties.

I am only referring to Labour and Conservatives as I couldn’t back a Lib Dem constituency MP or Government.

Probably because we don’t want to be insulted.

GrannyRose15

Luckygirl3

Most former Tory voters I know have been horrified by the absence of integrity shown by the government - firstly in voting in Boris Johnson on the promise of cabinet posts when they knew he was not competent or honest enough for the role; and then in giving us Liz Truss (heaven help us!). I suspect that our sitting Tory MP he appalled by the absence of integrity too.

So good of you to let us know what everyone thinks Luckygirl. Saves so much time when one person speaks for all. On the other hand I would have much preferred to have read some reasoned posts from individuals than hearing the popular tropes yet again

I don't thin that reporting what tory voters Luckygirl knows think is telling us what 'everyone thinks.'

I think that we'd all be interested in reading some reasoned posts from tory voters, but they're not exactly forthcoming, are they?

GrannyRose15

Luckygirl3

Most former Tory voters I know have been horrified by the absence of integrity shown by the government - firstly in voting in Boris Johnson on the promise of cabinet posts when they knew he was not competent or honest enough for the role; and then in giving us Liz Truss (heaven help us!). I suspect that our sitting Tory MP he appalled by the absence of integrity too.

So good of you to let us know what everyone thinks Luckygirl. Saves so much time when one person speaks for all. On the other hand I would have much preferred to have read some reasoned posts from individuals than hearing the popular tropes yet again

Funny thing the English language.

"Most former Tory voters I know have been horrified" - I guess at a stretch that could mean "I know that most Tory voters have been horrified" but it does of course refer to Tory voters of my acquaintance.

DaisyAnneReturns

Answer what GSM? Luckygirl had her answer and has returned to the subject.

Whatever you I think I 'owe' you or anyone else, your overweening sense of entitlement is just that and you are certainly not "entitled" to anything from me.

If, by now, you cannot recognise posts from those on the far-left, far-right, democratic centre or outwith democracy, I doubt anyone can help you.

I am entitled to courtesy from you, as are we all. It seems to be in short supply.

Luckygirl3

Most former Tory voters I know have been horrified by the absence of integrity shown by the government - firstly in voting in Boris Johnson on the promise of cabinet posts when they knew he was not competent or honest enough for the role; and then in giving us Liz Truss (heaven help us!). I suspect that our sitting Tory MP he appalled by the absence of integrity too.

So good of you to let us know what everyone thinks Luckygirl. Saves so much time when one person speaks for all. On the other hand I would have much preferred to have read some reasoned posts from individuals than hearing the popular tropes yet again

gangy5

Such a pitty that this thread has veered from the original subject, Fancythat stated her reasons for no longer favouring the Tory party.
I assume that the majority of Gransnetters would have liked have heard the views of other posters on why they are falling out with the Tories and how they might consider voting in the future.

Exactly. It would have been informative and might even have influenced the way people chose to vote.