The Conservative Party

Absolutely. There's this idea that social problems are caused by laziness or poor moral standards, as if these things are in terminal decline. But the reality is that there are just as many lazy people now as there were 60 years ago. There are just as many shit parents as there were 60 years ago (although to be fair, more having to do it by themselves). The difference is the environment they're in. You've got a country that is impossible to live in without having two parents working. You've got more and more people having to move far away from their family, so they can't rely so much on grandparents for help. You've got supermarkets full of ultra processed food that is quicker and easier to cook, and lasts longer in your cupboard/freezer. And now you're not getting your kids' regular dental checkup. Is it any wonder there are so many fat kids with shit teeth? I remember watching an early episode of QI where they pointed out that British kids had the healthiest teeth in the world. I wonder how far we've fallen since that was recorded.


Is it nanny state? I went to primary school in the late 80s, early 90s, and we definitely had a dentist come in to teach us how to properly brush our teeth. Is that really a controversial idea? Is it any different from the firefighters coming in to talk about fire safety, or the police doing a class on road safety? If it's the actual teachers having to teach it, that's another story. I reckon they've probably got enough on their plates with the maths, English, science, etc, without expecting them to solve all of society's problems on top of that, especially those caused by lack of funding in other areas.
Schools that have Nursery / Reception (Early Years) classes are required to teach oral hygiene as part of the Early Years Framework. As such, this forms part of the Ofsted Inspection Framework.
 
More like blind obedience or economic self-interest from the 20%.

I do wish people would vote for their own economic self interest, because with this version of the Tory Party there are only about 4%-5% who really gain from their policies like reducing Inheritance tax and scrapping limits on Bankers Bonuses.

Previous incarnations of the the Tory Party at least had policies that benefitted a wide part of the electorate, but this lot are Liz Truss mental as anything. They exploit the fact that many people don't recognise the link between their votes and their income/living standards.

I knew Boris was in for a landslide last time round when a scruffy guy interviewed while he was going round the food bank said he would be voting for Boris. It's people like him that are the problem, not rich privately educated posh knobs voting for other privately educated posh knobs.
 
This is interesting, not seen this kind of analysis until now.

According to this poll, the average Labour polling lead is 24 pts (slightly less than YouGov have quoted but roughly the same as other pollsters). Importantly though, if you look at the seats Labour would target, the 150 closest contested seats, the poll lead is even wider.

It seems that this 20-25% of the vote the Tories are clinging onto is disproportionately concentrated in their safest seats. It already looked bleak for them but this just makes it way worse.

 
This is interesting, not seen this kind of analysis until now.

According to this poll, the average Labour polling lead is 24 pts (slightly less than YouGov have quoted but roughly the same as other pollsters). Importantly though, if you look at the seats Labour would target, the 150 closest contested seats, the poll lead is even wider.

It seems that this 20-25% of the vote the Tories are clinging onto is disproportionately concentrated in their safest seats. It already looked bleak for them but this just makes it way worse.



It's not that surprising, is it?
A lot of those will be the Red Wall seats which they want back, and 150 of the other 200 Conservative seats they haven't a hope of winning, but the LibDems do.
 
It's not that surprising, is it?
A lot of those will be the Red Wall seats which they want back, and 150 of the other 200 Conservative seats they haven't a hope of winning, but the LibDems do.

I guess it’s not surprising no, but it isn’t exactly intuitive to me. I expected them to be bleeding votes in safer Tory seats because statistically there’s more Tories in those areas in the first place. Just seems probable to me if you pick a pissed off former Tory voter at random then they’d probably be in a safe Tory seat because there’s way more Tory voters in Tory safe seats.

It conversely means that Labour aren’t just piling up votes in safe areas like London, for the maths to work like this they must be winning them in battlegrounds.
 

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top
  AdBlock Detected
Bluemoon relies on advertising to pay our hosting fees. Please support the site by disabling your ad blocking software to help keep the forum sustainable. Thanks.