Those who support or lean towards the Labour Party, why?

[Kardan]

Like I said before:



The conservatives offering an EU referendum is just a tactic for votes, they said the same thing at the last election and it didn't happen.

I'm assuming your opinion on education is based on the rise in tuition fees? Labour were the ones who introduced fees in the first place! The promised reduction is NOTHING EXCEPT A BRIBE FOR YOUR VOTE.

Labour were also the ones who abolished technical colleges, turning them into universities. No longer would plumbers/electricians/mechanics get trained up at the level they needed but instead were encouraged to go to university instead. This was Labour's way of skewing the figures to make it look like more people were in university than ever before, they would rather people got degrees in useless subjects like media than gain the skills needed to actually keep the country running. It also meant that people who wanted to become mechanics/electricians now had to do more expensive courses to gain their qualifications, all thanks to Labour. Labour portray themselves as trying to help people, yet almost EVERYTHING they do undermines the working class making it more difficult for people to actually get a leg up. There's so much contradiction in what people think Labour stand for and what they really stand for. They don't want people to succeed. If people succeed they would have no voters left!

Even as recently as 2009 Labour made it law that by 2013 all nurses had to have a university nursing degree. Another hurdle to stop people doing the jobs the country needs and replace them with migrant workers. This meant nurses had to go through the university system and end up with student debt instead of going on free nurse training courses. The NHS isn't just in a state thanks to the Tories, Labour's policies were still coming into action as recently as two years ago! More people just where Labour want them, in hardship.

I agree that the increase in tuition fees was wrong, especially when Scotland gets to go to university for free.

What the conservatives have done during their time in government is start to reintroduce technical colleges; they know that people need to be trained up to work for the country, otherwise you become reliant on migrant workers to fill key jobs which is all part of Labour's greater plan. Labour bribe you with the odd thousand pounds here and there but you need to look at the bigger picture, they're dangerous for this country's wellbeing.

Michael Gove may not have been the best education secretary; for schools the best option is to pick a system and then leave it alone and not change it every few governments. Labour were no better at this, they first removed grammar schools and turned them into state schools, and then turned the state schools into academies which did no better end job than the state schools. The only difference it made was intelligent children from poor backgrounds no longer being able to apply to schools with entry requirements, the intelligent were mixed in with the more difficult pupils to deliberately reduce the levels of effective education, they INCREASED the education gap between the poor and rich whilst feeding people the line it was all about equality to mix different levels of pupils, again so they can point the finger at the Conservatives for an unfair society and their newly produced under-educated society would vote for them believing it! What's more the academies were able to pay their leadership staff more instead of spending the money on pupils.

So in short: you're afraid the country doesn't agree with you on the EU so don't want people to be afforded the opportunity to voice their opinion, and you don't like the recent changes made to the education system but haven't actually scrutinised Labour's track record and will take what Miliband says at face value.

It's like the way people argue that the Conservatives have been privatising the NHS... when Labour privatised twice as much as the Conservatives to begin with!

When people vote for Labour "because they don't want the Conservatives" or "don't want a vote on the EU", then it IS a pathetic argument. It's as simple as that.

People don't even argue to agree with the incredible amount of changes Labour made in the past which have vastly changed the country for the worse, only basing their argument on two idealistic points (maybe they don't actually agree with Labour's dreadful past and deludedly think they've ACTUALLY changed this time round. Get real). It is idiocy.

Look into the details and don't be a sheep that takes what politicians say at face value. There is so much wrong with the Labour party it's quite unbelievable people still vote for them.

No, it's not about tuition fees, otherwise I'd be voting greens since they want to scrap it. It's also quite astounding how many assumptions you make about people based on their choice of political party.

Yes Labour have made mistakes, and so have every other party that has ever had a part to play in a government. Probably worth telling you that I'll still vote Labour despite you trying to convince me otherwise.

[Firehorse]

No, it's not about tuition fees, otherwise I'd be voting greens since they want to scrap it. It's also quite astounding how many assumptions you make about people based on their choice of political party.

Yes Labour have made mistakes, and so have every other party that has ever had a part to play in a government. Probably worth telling you that I'll still vote Labour despite you trying to convince me otherwise.

If not tuition fees then what? I didn't just discuss tuition fees I discussed the entire education system, which you have sidestepped even mentioning in your response.

I'm not trying to convince you to change your vote, only justify your opinion (which you haven't done). If you can't justify your opinion then it holds no substance. Who you vote for is your own entitlement, I just deem it overly zealous to support a party based on one or two election promises and their ideals whilst ignoring the reality of their history in government.

[Alysha]

I feel like this thread fully defines why voting is anonymous. Personally, I wouldn't vote for any of the main parties, but alas, the choice will always be limited.
I'd prefer not to have David Cameron as Prime Minister, but that isn't to say I disagree with conservative policies. I'm not likely to vote for them ever though.
Labour are too lax in their financial choices.
I wish the Lib Dems actually stood a chance at making any change.
I'm not for UK independence.
Greens only have about 2 policies that I care about.
Plaid Cymru won't gain anything external with a few local votes.
Meh. Highly undecided.

Might I add, that no one has to justify their vote. Ever. You may be trying to keep the thread alive, but it's not your place to judge their choice even with their reasoning.

[Firehorse]

Might I add, that no one has to justify their vote. Ever. You may be trying to keep the thread alive, but it's not your place to judge their choice even with their reasoning.

Sorry but there is so much wrong with not having to justify opinion. There are some very racist and dangerous people in the world yet their arguments can be undone by simply asking them to make a justification for the argument.

No justification of opinion is very serious; you believe in something but don't even know why you believe in it? Ridiculous!

Let's look at a significant example of history where people could not justify their opinions: WWII Germany... "Why do you hate Jews?". There was no justification. People only knew they hated Jews because that's what the government and others told them. It was the popular opinion, but that didn't make it right. If you make decisions with no basis in fact or experience then you make bad decisions. It's not about bullying people into believing what you believe (this is ironically what unjustified opinion largely achieves, as demonstrated by the WWII case study), it's just about making sure people KNOW WHAT THEY'RE ACTUALLY DOING AND MORE IMPORTANTLY KNOW WHY THEY'RE DOING IT.

I'm also not judging anybody for their choice of vote, as I have mentioned previously. People have the right to vote for whomever they wish, and everybody has the right to scrutinise and make people think twice about who they're voting for. If I don't change anybody's mind on the party they're voting for then my posts will not have been for nothing. People can read the reasons for voting Labour, read the reasons for not voting Labour, and then make their own informed opinions. Someone might read the negative arguments and then be encouraged to think about other aspects that may not have been mentioned and develop a more informed counter argument which may very well defeat the anti-Labour argument; which I very much welcome because it would help me further inform my own opinions, and would afford others the same opportunity.

Do you disagree with scrutiny? Do you believe the BNP should never have been scrutinised? Maybe the EDL shouldn't be scrutinised? The KKK shouldn't have been scrutinised? Do you think paedophile rings shouldn't be scrutinised? Neo-Nazis? ISIS? What is wrong with scrutiny? Scrutiny only weeds out the bad; those that can stand up to scrutiny through justification of opinion and action deserve merit, not those that just sort of say "because I believe in it". Guess what, people who support those organisations believe in an ideal without being able to justify it. I can justify why I would vote for a number of parties, but I have a real problem with people who would vote for a party without really even knowing why they're doing so other than because "they believe in the ideal".

People have the right to anonymity in their vote, and nobody here has been asked to justify their vote; only justify reasoning that has already been voiced publicly which is a different matter.

I've given a lot of argument yet my real vote still remains anonymous, for all you know I might vote Labour, or for an independent MP.

The aim of argument is to inform, not to belittle.

Debate is a brilliant way of exchanging opinions and ideas; it should never be discouraged.

[Kardan]

If not tuition fees then what? I didn't just discuss tuition fees I discussed the entire education system, which you have sidestepped even mentioning in your response.

I'm not trying to convince you to change your vote, only justify your opinion (which you haven't done). If you can't justify your opinion then it holds no substance. Who you vote for is your own entitlement, I just deem it overly zealous to support a party based on one or two election promises and their ideals whilst ignoring the reality of their history in government.

The Labour party will ensure that all teachers in state schools are qualified, something I believe should be done. The Conservatives are quite happy having unqualified teachers in permanent job roles in schools. I wouldn't want an unqualified surgeon operating on me, so why should we allow unqualified teachers to teach?
I'm not a fan of free schools which were set up by the Conservative party - not only are they allowed to employ unqualified teachers but councils have absolutely no control over the schools, yet the council are the ones held responsible if there are issues with school places in the local area. Of course, one benefit with free schools is that there is an increase in school places but because they are free schools and the council have no responsibility with where they are built, they are often built in places where extra places aren't needed, the money the government are providing should be spent on building schools in areas that need the extra places, especially primary schools.
Other education policies I agree with: Compulsory sex and relationship education, including the targeting of homophobic bullying within schools. Of course the reduction in tuition fees to £6,000 is better than the current situation but it is not ideal.

Non-education policies that 'justify' my vote for Labour: They will ensure that University students are not deterred by immigration laws. Introducing a tax on bankers bonuses, a 5% pay cut for every government minister, a drive against tax avoidance by keeping money overseas, GP appointments within 48 hours, prioritising children's mental health services, getting rid of zero hour contracts, pushing apprenticeships for those that choose not to go to university, scrapping of police and crime commissioners, banning child sex offenders from working with children, withdrawal of winter fuel allowance from wealthy pensioners, increase of paternity leave from 2 to 4 weeks, and an increase in pay for paternity leave and a rise in minimum wage.

I'm not going to waste my time and explain in depth why I agree with all those non-education policies and even if I did I'm sure you'll manage to come up with something that will 'counter-act' each of my points whether that be 'Well the Conservatives have a better policy on that' or 'Labour wouldn't need to do that if they didn't mess it up in their last government'.

Probably also worth saying that yes, at the moment they're just plans, and yes it's very likely that even if Labour win a majority they won't implement everything I agree with during the next 5 years, but please tell me a party that has always delivered 100% of the things it claimed to do before an election. Out of the two main parties, who do I think will do a better job in the next 5 years? Labour. So I'm voting for them. Am I an avid Labour campaigner and will I think it's the end of the world if the Conservatives stay in power? No. But my mind is still made up.

[-:Undertaker:-]

So basically @Kardan; wants all the fluffy sounding and expensive things.

Without a clue how to pay for them. Without a clue as to what the unintended consequences will be.

The road to Hell is paved with good intentions, as they say.

withdrawal of winter fuel allowance from wealthy pensioners

Why would you want to do that rather than say scrap the foreign aid budget?

My Nan and Grandad have worked all their lives for everything they own, including their own house. If something were to happen to them where they needed care, they would have to sell their house to pay for that care which would be the same care as somebody who sat on their arse all their lives and spent their money in the Bingo Hall every friday night would also be entitled to. And it's the same with the winter fuel allowance: why should those who have paid into the pot get charged extra for something they paid for?

I love it when left wingers talk about fairness, they don't know the meaning of the word.

getting rid of zero hour contracts

Companies will simply get around that by introducing shorter contracts.

Introducing a tax on bankers bonuses

So you want to punish our most successful industry and ensure that it goes to Frankfurt and Hong Kong?

Let's get this straight: bankers and people who are productive are one thousand times more clever than you or Labour ministers. They will always get around you.

banning child sex offenders from working with children

Trusting the party of Rotherham and the party that is soft on crime to do that?

pushing apprenticeships for those that choose not to go to university

And when they finish their apprenticeships?

They'll find that, thanks to Labour, all the low skilled jobs are occupied by foreign workers.

Do you not put two and two together?

[Kardan]

Damn, Undertaker decided to do it despite saying he wouldn't have a go at people and despite saying he wouldn't post again. I was so sure that Hashterix was going to be the one.

[-:Undertaker:-]

Damn, Undertaker decided to do it despite saying he wouldn't have a go at people and despite saying he wouldn't post again. I was so sure that Hashterix was going to be the one.

We await your reply.

Don't you put two and two together when agreeing to all these things? Do you think people like myself are against more paternity leave, new schools buildings and more mental health services because we are just simply evil or because we think of things like.. uhhh I don't know, the costs + consequences?

Tell me why my nan and grandad should have to pay through their noses for something they've paid for over and over? So you can feel good about yourself?

[Kardan]

And do you think because I'm voting Labour I must be opposed to cutting any of the foreign aid budget?

I see the winter fuel allowance as a benefit, to help those that are not able to do so. Just like we don't give out JSA to those that have jobs, the winter fuel allowance I think should only be given to pensioners that are seriously in danger of not paying their fuel costs. In fact, I wouldn't be too opposed to scrapping it altogether.

In fact, you've convinced me, instead of voting for the Europe loving paedophiles that spend spend spend, I'm going to vote for UKIP! I've seen the light!

[The Don]

Damn, Undertaker decided to do it despite saying he wouldn't have a go at people and despite saying he wouldn't post again. I was so sure that Hashterix was going to be the one.

He has the self-awareness of one of those street preachers that desperately tries to convert you despite the fact you've already politely said no