Conservative voters: Why this election, you need to vote for someone else

Conservative Logo with Union Flag Colouring

Thank you for taking the time to read this post. I assure you that it is not going to be a bias attack of the values you hold dear. Instead, I will demonstrate that your values and the future success of the Conservative Party, depends on action now.

I am not going to second guess why you intend to vote for the Conservative Party. But if you just always have done, please check out my previous post. I am also not going to argue against the policies, I will assume that you are well versed in the manifestos issued this year. Although, I highly recommend taking this online test.As no matter who you vote for, it is insightful.

Instead I am going to use Game Theory and the benefits of improved equality to demonstrate how your values and the Conservative Party would benefit from a tactical vote.

The Game Theory rationale

Game theory is the study of mathematical models to derive optimalpositioning/decision making. In political terms this can most simply be seen in the traditional left wing vs right wing spectrum.

Voters are spread across this line. Each party aligns themselves along this line, taking the portion of voters nearest to them. The idea is to position your party where it will get the most votes. This is why, in recent years, The Labour Party and Conservative Party have always been the 2 main parties. They position themselves centrally. A bit to the left and right of each other, enabling the greatest reach of voter capture.

When other parties in your catchment zone do well, they take voters away from you, equally if they fail, you are there to collect the votes. For the Conservative Party, this is most visible with UKIP voters, whom sitting to your right are more traditionally going to perceive the Conservative Party as an alternative than a party further left.

The unbalanced electorate spread

Now just because you have been positioning yourself centrally to the electorate does not mean that you are a central party. In fact over the past few decades, the ‘centre’ has been drifting right in the UK. This has meant that the labour and Conservatives are both far more right wing than their counterpart parties in Europe. However, particularly since the financial crash, the electorate has been returning to a more balanced position.

The problem for the Conservative Party is that they are failing to move quickly to reflect this. Some noises have been mooted to this effect within the manifesto, but not nearly enough. The Labour manifesto is considered by some as particularly left wing. It actually remains to the right of their peer parties in Europe. they are however addressing a changing electorate, staying just right enough to ensure optimal positioning.Game Theory Example

If the Conservative Party were to succeed this election, they would miss the opportunity to re-position themselves to reflect the electorate. If they were not to succeed, a more robust change would be required to party policy, ensuring a quicker return to a competitive and optimal stance. A vote against the Conservative Party at this election, would be a vote for a stronger Conservative Party at the next election.

Increased Equality: Why this matters to Conservative voters

If you want any of the following, it really matters and I will tell you why:

  • A strong economy
  • Low crime
  • Reduced Terrorism
  • The ability for hard work to be rewarded
  • For your Children and Grandchildren to have the opportunities you worked hard for them to have
  • Security and freedom of the UK
  • The UK to be a powerful voice in the world
  • High employment levels

What greater equality is not

  • It is not Communism.
  • It does not fund laziness.
  • It is not a threat to innovation and industry.
  • It is not a punishment of the hard-working and the successful.
  • It is not exclusively a Left-wing ideal. Although left wing parties are often more outspoken, there are conservative parties globally who support this.

What Greater Equality is

  • It is a means to ensure that all hard work is appreciated, respected and paid appropriately. The gap between the CEO of a company and the lowest paid member of staff should be reflected. Each individual contributes to the success of the company, thereby a fair distribution of the company’s success would mean that a CEO would only earn a fixed times amount more than the lowest paid. For some companies, this is 100+ times as much, but do they really work that much harder? When someone earns so much more than someone else, it is not a reward for their work, it is a fine to the rest. It is undervaluing their contribution, their hard work leading to greater job dissatisfaction.
  • The tightening of taxation on the top 1% and of the largest corporations is not a punishment. It is a gesture to rebalance society.
  • A basic living wage for all would remove poverty. In turn this would improve the health and education of a nation. It would actually ease the stress on the economy.
  • More equal education would enable our industries to hire more qualified staff. It would allow greater freedom for the individual to choose their desired career path. This in turn would lead to greater job satisfaction. This leads to more effort being given to the work, greater innovation. A strong, future proofed economy.
  • Countries with better equality are less engaged in war. They recognise the contribution of all individuals who make up the success of their nation. They have strong relationships with other global nations, facilitating trade and peace.
  • You could live longer. Unlike our more equal counterparts, the UK’s life expectancy has not improved in recent years. Despite the fact that the UK is much wealthier than the majority of these nations.

Does it all sound too good to be true?

If there were not already dozens of countries demonstrating the benefits of improved equality, I would understand your concern. But they are there to follow. Each nation is rewarded with falling crime levels, corruption and poverty. They have improved mortality rates, better healthcare, better performance in education. Better lives. This isn’t just a platitude, the top 5 nations on the equality measure are also the 5 happiest nations on the planet.

It does take a bit of a longer term view, I admit. How quick this can be achieved will depend upon how quick parties are to address inequality. I recognise that change can be scary, but not long ago women were given the vote and you can’t say that this example of improved equality was a bad thing. That is all this is, a different way of thinking that very quickly will feel normal and you will wonder what the problem was.

At present, the Conservative manifesto is proposing policies which exacerbate inequality. To speed the process of achieving a ‘Strong and Stable’ nation, a vote against the Conservative Party, will demonstrate a desire in their voter base for greater equality. For longer, happier and more successful lives for all.

Thank you for your time. I hope this has given you some food for thought. I will not tell you how to vote, although I still feel it is important to vote. But if you could consider a tactical vote the impact would be worthwhile. If this post has you thinking further, please message me for more information on any of these topics – there is only so much I can put in a blog post.

To any non-Conservative voters, please send this page to your Conservative voting friends

What’s in a Motto?

,A short sentence or phrase chosen as encapsulating the beliefs or ideals of an individual, family, or institution.

The choice of Motto that various political parties choose to stand behind have been very carefully crafted.  Here I look at the 2 main parties and their choice of Motto.

The Conservative Party

Strong and Stable Leadership in the National interest

This is crying out to the traditional voter. Globally, conservative values are generally about national pride. In Support of the nation’s interests, more than its presence in the wider world. Reassurance is found in tradition, looking to the past, at previous strengths and leaders. Comfort in slow, steady progress.Theresa May at a party campaign event

The Motto is literally calling out these ideals word for word, feeding directly into the comforting ideals felt by Conservative voters. Unlike the Labour Party which can to some extent lean on a fanbase of support for the party leader, the same emotions are not exuded from the Conservative voter base for Theresa May, instead their main tactic is to satisfy their traditional voter base with comforting but vague platitudes.

The Labour Party

For the Many, not the few

This statement also calls upon the ideals of traditional labour voters and others with liberal ideals. These tend to be a more global in outlook. A sense of being a part of a wider community and as such there is a strong sense of fairness and equality.

The Motto reflects both the traditional ideology and acts to distinguish the party from New Labour and its ‘New Labour, New life for Britain’ slogan which had been tailored more to conservative sensibilities.

The ideological foundation of the motto rJeremy Corbyneflects the leader, Jeremy Corbyn. In doing so the motto can be representative both of the policies within the manifesto and of the leader as a man of the people, which has given him a level of fandom.

So what does this tell us?

It tells us that the Conservatives are offering more of the same. Traditional, slow and steady, isolationist in the National interest and that they are dependant upon a traditional supporter base. The motto does not reach out to left leaning voters, so it could be considered likely that attacking the opposition to weaken confidence will be a main tactic. This behaviour will not do much damage to Theresa, as the success is built more around the party traditions than her as a personality.

Labour on the other hand are intending to differentiate themselves from the party in power. They are openly talking about what matters to the majority. To be more open, global, progressive.  They are also putting weight into the cult of personality that has been bestowed upon their leader. He may not be a brash, outspoken individual, but in the same way that being different worked for Trump in the US, the breath of fresh air in Jeremy’s calm and considered manner is what is what has proven so popular to his fans here.

But which does the UK need?

At a time when the world is divisive, with anger directed in all directions for the global economic state and increasingly heated global political tensions. Is another nation distancing themselves and only talking of self interests really in our best interests. Or would a calm, yet calculated approach to engagement and reform be the UK’s best hope for economic and social renewal?