Election night 2019 / aftermath

[vuk]

You make an interesting point.

If, as is often claimed, a Corbyn-led, 'far left' (their term) government would have been a disaster for the UK, then it does seem likely that this country's enemies, chief amongst them the Russians, would have deployed their considerable resources into subtly manipulating the situation so as to bring it about, and thus weaken the UK.

I'm pretty sure if that had been the evidence in the, now buried, report into Russian interference, then Boris would have been keen to ensure every editor had a copy on their desk well ahead of the election.

He didn't, which does imply the reverse might be the case. From which it follows that the Russians prefer a Tory, right-wing government. That might be because, ideologically, they stand to benefit more from a like-minded, kleptocratic administration, or it might be that Putin sees the best way to bring the UK to its knees is to install an incompetent government, stocked with self-serving idiots. So, either a kleptocracy, or an idiocracy, but either way, not in our nation's best interests.

is this a joke posting?

 

[sean99]

Why is it that people vote massively Tory in rural areas? Look at that shocking blue/red map we all saw on Friday morning.
I find it hard to comprehend. Does anybody have a rational explanation?

Here's my theory:

Right wing voters are motivated by fear and anxiety - largely of other people. They view people as mostly untrustworthy, and needing strict rules to keep them in line. Therefore they like to live in low population densities.
Left wing voters tend to seek out company, crowds and new experiences. Therefore they like to live in large towns and cities.

 

[Sue Pertwee-Tyr]

is this a joke posting?

I see very little scope for humour in the current mess. But actually, vuk, if you wish to express disagreement, vehement or otherwise, you'd do rather better to do so without descending into snidery and borderline ad-hom. It undermines your lofty academic pretensions.

 

[MikeMA]

no, it is not conclusive at all. we have correlational evidence that can be interpreted many ways.

There is correlational evidence that people drift rightwards as they get older? For me that is sufficient for this argument, as we aren't really looking for the reasons. The fact that it happens is sufficient.

 

[glancaster]

have most people in the USA and UK been accumulating wealth and can you show me the studies connecting this to voting?

i agree that it is a plausible effect. i have great difficulty imagining it fully/mostly explain that UK voting map.

The main UK demographics of the 2019 election, as to whether you are more likely to vote Labour or Tory, are:

1. Gender makes little or no difference.
2. Age makes a huge difference. Labour voters are younger.
3. Education makes a huge difference. Labour voters are better educated. I think this is a relatively new phenomenon -- not perhaps what you'd expect for the 'party of the working class'. The effect is still there if you control for age, which is correlated with education.
4. [Edit: I misread this first time] Social class makes little or no difference. Wow!

Nicest summary charts: https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politic...general-election-demographics-dividing-britai
Full results: https://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.n...nt/ikcd0firii/InternalResults_191029_W1_w.pdf

Kind regards

- Garry

 

[vuk]

Apologies vuk, I haven't followed your arguments in any detail, but do you have an alternative hypothesis for the map?

first of all, i am not saying i know what the causal factors are. there are probably many and they are of different weight. one of the things people here don't seem to understand is what's called a "history" effect. you may think you are observing a change that is the function time, but it's actually a change in the environment.

i suspect that the collapsing of capitalist ideas (look at wealth inequality and climate catastrophe) is causing a big shift in how society is viewing collectivism. now, to have a view, you have to have information and, if you are getting it the old-fashioned way via corporate media, then that will be different than if you are open to independent media, which is mainly internet-based.

it's not easy to disentangle and study, but it seems plausible as a big factor to me.

 

[vuk]

There is correlational evidence that people drift rightwards as they get older?

no!!!!!!! the correlation is between age and right/left voting trend. to talk about drift, you have to do a longitudinal study AND, for it to be meaningful, you have to conduct it for a very, very long time.

 

[vuk]

2. Age makes a huge difference. Labour voters are younger.
3. Education makes a huge difference. Labour voters are better educated.

sort of backs what i was saying at the outset.

 

[Colin L]

It is not aging alone that causes people to become more conservative. It’s that as many age, they tend to accumulate wealth. Once they get past 50 or so, their mindset turns to protecting what they’ve got. They vote for lower taxes, and against wealth redistribution. In other words, they vote with their wallets.

Exactly... its classic pulling up the ladder after you've got on board. I've got mine and screw everyone else.
The mistake is that when you need good free medical and end-life services they won't be there for you under the Tories.

 

[bob]

Here's my theory:

Right wing voters are motivated by fear and anxiety - largely of other people. They view people as mostly untrustworthy, and needing strict rules to keep them in line. Therefore they like to live in low population densities.
Left wing voters tend to seek out company, crowds and new experiences. Therefore they like to live in large towns and cities.

Or maybe some people were brought up or work in the countryside, or just like having a bit of space to move about in. Perhaps they like trees and meadows or fields of barley or corn. I'm very much central politically but I don't like big towns and cities, I lived all my adult life just outside of Durham City and that suited me fine, I now live in Spain in a small community outside of a village but I'm not a Tory.

 

[MikeMA]

no!!!!!!! the correlation is between age and right/left voting trend. to talk about drift, you have to do a longitudinal study AND, for it to be meaningful, you have to conduct it for a very, very long time.

Yes I know. I said pretty much exactly that in an earlier post. I think we may be talking at cross-porposes. Anyway, I'm off out for dinner!

 

[Rockmeister]

The main UK demographics of the 2019 election, as to whether you are more likely to vote Labour or Tory, are:

1. Gender makes little or no difference.
2. Age makes a huge difference. Labour voters are younger.
3. Education makes a huge difference. Labour voters are better educated. I think this is a relatively new phenomenon -- not perhaps what you'd expect for the 'party of the working class'. The effect is still there if you control for age, which is correlated with education.
4. [Edit: I misread this first time] Social class makes little or no difference. Wow!

Nicest summary charts: https://yougov.co.uk/topics/politic...general-election-demographics-dividing-britai
Full results: https://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.n...nt/ikcd0firii/InternalResults_191029_W1_w.pdf

Kind regards

- Garry

Thats interesting, esp the 'better ed' of labour voters, which is NOT the way it's painted (ie, posh kids go more often to Uni, esp OXBRIDGE). I think it may well be true that educated working class kids with a grammer/uni route tend to end up voting left, but I'm not it construes therefore that labour voters are all better educated?

 

[Rockmeister]

Exactly... its classic pulling up the ladder after you've got on board. I've got mine and screw everyone else.
The mistake is that when you need good free medical and end-life services they won't be there for you under the Tories.

Well Col, when you get there and want to hand all yours over despite the needs of your family, I'll take some off you. PM me for my address if I'm still around.
OFC we want to 'hang on to it' what did we work for FFS? That's not pulling up a ladder. WE still consider other people, help where we can etc. Those broad stereotypes are so daft, sry.

 

[Weekender]

The Labour seats that turned blue are socially conservative and economically left. This is a new factor brought out by Brexit. Boris may struggle to hold into them as they will be expecting spends.

 

[i.j.russell]

This is an interesting/frightning read (10 minutes or so):
https://eand.co/this-is-how-a-society-dies-35bdc3c0b854

 

[chartz]

I live in the countryside myself and people here massively vote conservative or far right.
Oddly—or perhaps not?— only left and far left party voters and environmentalists speak freely about what they think, the other guys never quite make it clear what they do in the voting booth.

This is an interesting/frightning read (10 minutes or so):
https://eand.co/this-is-how-a-society-dies-35bdc3c0b854

Very interesting indeed. I quote:

"Those things — good healthcare, education, transport, media — kept life improving for everyone. That virtuous circle of investing a fairly distributed social surplus created a true economic miracle over just one human lifetime: Europe rose from the ashes of war to enjoy history’s highest living standards, ever, period."

Those things we all take for granted—and fight for in December 2019—were all obtained by left wing socio-democrats in France. By people marching in the streets.
The conservatives brought us nothing but deceptions.

 

[doctorf]

I don't know on what basis you make the assertion I have made bold, in the above. Johnson is, unlike Corbyn, a conman in the literal sense of the term, and he doesn't exactly have an iron grip on the nutters in his party (the ERG), yet he has just been re-elected.

Which rather undermines your theory, does it not?

Blair’s project ensured that the left wing nutters were marginalised and he made sure they were never seen or heard in his election campaigns.
With his majority, Johnson can, if he wishes, sideline the ERG group in a similar manner.
The problem with the LP is that Momentum have made sure that a Blair like character can never again takeover the Party. That is why it will be a long time before the LP will be anything other than a protest party.

 

[Mike Reed]

Once they get past 50 or so, their mindset turns to protecting what they’ve got.

Well, wisdom would be a strong contender as well here, but if you've lived and worked for 40/50 years and haven't anything to show for that, then something's gone wrong. Assets are a natural end product of a working life. Who wouldn't want to protect these?

 

[gassor]

Only a half smile, surely, as McDonnell (sp?)was equally accorded the same label.

No, a full-on smile. McDonnell has called himself a Marxist at the end of a speech to Trade Unionists. I doubt he really meant it, but there you go.

 

[SteveS1]

If you wanted to attack Labour, you'd focus on the easy stuff: Corbyn himself and the Brexit policy. It would be a mistake to assume that, on that basis, the rest of it was fine: if those two corkers had been dealt with, the right would have found something else. As it was, they didn't need to trouble themselves too much with that. The proposition was never properly tested.

Obviously people would find other things to attack but those two issues were show stoppers. Many people quite on board with the platform, or certainly not spooked by it just "would not put that man in No 10". There was some cynicism about pledges but it was as nothing compared.

Without Brexit, Johnson would have had an austerity programme to defend and the fact that they had nine years to look after their new audience. You think that would have gone OK?