Why do poor people keep voting Labour..

[Cyclone]

Tax credits & benefits often go unclaimed due to the stigma flying about honest people get tarred with the same brush as dishonest people.

 

So why should anyone do more than shrug their shoulders. It's still silly to not claim it, no matter what the reason, but it's not criminal.

[Grandad.Malky]

I think you misunderstand why I think you're living in a funny world Malky.

 

 

Each to their own, no doubt there are “some” genuine Lib voters but their numbers are swelled by disgruntled Lab or Con voters who will all be jumping ship like drowning rats

 

You think that the majority of tactical voters were voting against the conservatives and not labour, obviously not true

 

I am not going to argue about the makeup of the party but at least we seem to agree that the part is made up of tactical voters, a mixed bag of tactical voters by the looks of things.

 

http://today.yougov.co.uk/politics/liberal-democrats-popular-all-round

 

Just under half the country (49%) would vote for the Liberal Democrats if they were seen to have a reasonable chance of winning

 

popular opinion supporting the Lib Dems also extends to the much-debated possibility of a hung parliament. 49% would be either delighted or wouldn’t mind a coalition between the Lib Dems and Labour; 42% thought the same of a Lib Dem-Conservative coalition

[Cyclone]

Firstly, how many votes were tactical, very few given the numbers that 'normally' vote LD.

Secondly, the figures you quote there mean that more labour voters would have been happy with a coalition and less conservative voters. The reason for that is the labour voters knew they could never win, so the best option was a coalition. The conservative voters hoped to win and viewed a coalition as a 2nd best option.

The lib dem voters would have liked to win, but if not voting tactically (the vast majority) view a coalition with either party as the best option and ultimately better than having no part in the government.

[Grandad.Malky]

Firstly, how many votes were tactical, very few given the numbers that 'normally' vote LD.

.

 

We can only guess at the allegiance of the Lib voters but I would guess that there are a number that are Cons at heart and will be thinking “if I had voted Con we could have gained full control”, also there will be Lab supporters that voted tactically thinking “if I had stayed loyal we could have come second” .

 

Either way I see disgruntled voters switching back to their true allegiances once the coalition implodes leaving the Lib party high and try like in the late 70’s and early 80’s, only time will tell so in the meantime all we can do is agree to disagree and wait and see what happens.

[redrobbo]

We can only guess at the allegiance of the Lib voters but I would guess that there are a number that are Cons at heart and will be thinking “if I had voted Con we could have gained full control”, also there will be Lab supporters that voted tactically thinking “if I had stayed loyal we could have come second” .

...

 

Err ... Labour did come second both in the popular vote and number of seats won.

[Cyclone]

We can only guess at the allegiance of the Lib voters but I would guess that there are a number that are Cons at heart and will be thinking “if I had voted Con we could have gained full control”, also there will be Lab supporters that voted tactically thinking “if I had stayed loyal we could have come second” .

 

Either way I see disgruntled voters switching back to their true allegiances once the coalition implodes leaving the Lib party high and try like in the late 70’s and early 80’s, only time will tell so in the meantime all we can do is agree to disagree and wait and see what happens.

 

Agreeing that we don't know how many tactical voters there were means agreeing that your earlier statements are based on something you now admit to not knowing.

 

On that basis, I can agree that we wait and see.

[Grandad.Malky]

Agreeing that we don't know how many tactical voters there were means agreeing that your earlier statements are based on something you now admit to not knowing..

 

One can only go on what we see on TV and read in the press unless you have inside information.

 

On that basis, I can agree that we wait and see ..

 

 

Redrobbo Err ... Labour did come second both in the popular vote and number of seats won.

 

But still had no part to play in forming a coalition, so much for PR

[Cyclone]

One can only go on what we see on TV and read in the press unless you have inside information.

We can also look at how many people voted LD over the last few elections and compare to this one. There's no significant change, which would suggest that very few people were voting tactically. Indeed in many many constituencies there was no 'tactical' vote to make.

 

 

 

 

 

But still had no part to play in forming a coalition, so much for PR

 

PR doesn't exist at the moment, it's something that Labour and the Conservatives have fought against for decades. Blame your own party that you aren't represented in government, thank it that you actually have far more seats than you should according to the % of the population that voted for you.

[Grandad.Malky]

Blame your own party that you aren't represented in government, thank it that you actually have far more seats than you should according to the % of the population that voted for you.

 

Blame my party ……………. So you assume I voted Labour.