A lot to think about! It is true that we "don't look at the overall picture"; this is true most of us anyway, because it is true, " we want a decent and comfortable life". Your insights into 'domestic politics' and the 'geopolitical' realities echo debate and discussions, but the latter is overshadowed by the fact that 'domestically', we "want the country to do well and be protected". Maybe unions, if they want to be 'relevant' and ensure voters are "beholden to the union vote", need to present a bigger picture of 'geopolitics'.
As we know in the US, there are voters who will vote for the candidate and not the party as was true when Clinton was the candidate for the Democrats and many blues didn't vote because they didn't like her, and the same for the GOP. However, there were more GOP voters who would vote for the party regardless of who was the candidate and that is why they also won.
In the UK, being smaller, local elections are more frequent and so parties can change and be a coalition every couple of years so then no one party can be blamed. People generally vote for the party in the UK in the general election rather than the candidate (I have) because of how the system works. However, since the class systems have been blended and broken down over the decades there is less of a Labour/Conservative gap.
Labour is generally the choice of students and the working class who have an 'anarchist' position to fight for equality, but as there is equality (compared to 1940s) in many areas now there is less to fight for and what is fought for isn't relevant to the masses. That is why voters are looking at the personalities now and what their ambitions are, and if they have the personality to stand up to other world leaders. I believe that is why some Labour voters have moved to Conservative (something that no one would ever anticipate or even admit to) as Labour no longer offers them anything relevant to their lives.
I also believe that whoever wins the Conservative leadership, they will not win the general election unless they do something remarkable because the minds of the public have been decided already. I think the electorate want to teach the Conservative party a lesson, in that they can't oust leaders they voted for simply because they have a different agenda and believe their way is better.
A lot to think about! It is true that we "don't look at the overall picture"; this is true most of us anyway, because it is true, " we want a decent and comfortable life". Your insights into 'domestic politics' and the 'geopolitical' realities echo debate and discussions, but the latter is overshadowed by the fact that 'domestically', we "want the country to do well and be protected". Maybe unions, if they want to be 'relevant' and ensure voters are "beholden to the union vote", need to present a bigger picture of 'geopolitics'.
As we know in the US, there are voters who will vote for the candidate and not the party as was true when Clinton was the candidate for the Democrats and many blues didn't vote because they didn't like her, and the same for the GOP. However, there were more GOP voters who would vote for the party regardless of who was the candidate and that is why they also won.
In the UK, being smaller, local elections are more frequent and so parties can change and be a coalition every couple of years so then no one party can be blamed. People generally vote for the party in the UK in the general election rather than the candidate (I have) because of how the system works. However, since the class systems have been blended and broken down over the decades there is less of a Labour/Conservative gap.
Labour is generally the choice of students and the working class who have an 'anarchist' position to fight for equality, but as there is equality (compared to 1940s) in many areas now there is less to fight for and what is fought for isn't relevant to the masses. That is why voters are looking at the personalities now and what their ambitions are, and if they have the personality to stand up to other world leaders. I believe that is why some Labour voters have moved to Conservative (something that no one would ever anticipate or even admit to) as Labour no longer offers them anything relevant to their lives.
I also believe that whoever wins the Conservative leadership, they will not win the general election unless they do something remarkable because the minds of the public have been decided already. I think the electorate want to teach the Conservative party a lesson, in that they can't oust leaders they voted for simply because they have a different agenda and believe their way is better.
Thank you for that opinion, EL. As an Australian, it Is enlightening