He didn't do a U turn did he?

Well, the cuts are kicked down the road to compound the already disastrous roll out of universal credit. Which is a victory for now.

Policywise it WAS a victory ED.

AND Labour had an open goal - but somehow turned it into an own goal up the other end.

As a result the Tories came out of this seeming like they listened (instead of seeming incompetent with cruel cuts and under pressure U turns).

CarlPierce wrote:Policywise it WAS a victory ED.

AND Labour had an open goal - but somehow turned it into an own goal up the other end.

As a result the Tories came out of this seeming like they listened (instead of seeming incompetent with cruel cuts and under pressure U turns).

I don't think there is any room for doubt that Osbourne backed down. "U-turn" is all over the media today.
The coverage of the defeat in the House of Lords was high profile. I doubt that anyone who missed that would be enlightened by the shadow Chancellor's reply.

Osborne hasn't backed down. Some of the tax credit cuts will still be made and in the long-term they'll lose out with universal credit.

Sure, and no doubt those opposed to the tories will campaign just as hard against the introduction of universal credit when that nears.

Gideon will have missed more targets and this autumn statement will have long unravelled before that, too.

mcgruff wrote:Osborne hasn't backed down. Some of the tax credit cuts will still be made and in the long-term they'll lose out with universal credit.

Yes, but he has backed down on the way it will be phased in. He lost in the HoL.
He scrapped that part of his plans.

mcgruff wrote:Osborne hasn't backed down. Some of the tax credit cuts will still be made and in the long-term they'll lose out with universal credit.

Which is what he was elected to do, he was elected to make the unemployed and non-Tory voters suffer. The more they suffer the more his supporters will cheer

mrjonno wrote:

mcgruff wrote:Osborne hasn't backed down. Some of the tax credit cuts will still be made and in the long-term they'll lose out with universal credit.

Which is what he was elected to do, he was elected to make the unemployed and non-Tory voters suffer. The more they suffer the more his supporters will cheer

His problem then was in making the employed and Tory voters also suffer.

GrahamH wrote:

mrjonno wrote:

mcgruff wrote:Osborne hasn't backed down. Some of the tax credit cuts will still be made and in the long-term they'll lose out with universal credit.

Which is what he was elected to do, he was elected to make the unemployed and non-Tory voters suffer. The more they suffer the more his supporters will cheer

His problem then was in making the employed and Tory voters also suffer.

That's where he may have a problem, but Tory voters (ie the biggest group in the country) elected a governemnt whose main policy was screwing those at the bottom. These voters will judge the government on how much they can make these groups suffer.

mrjonno wrote:

GrahamH wrote:

mrjonno wrote:

mcgruff wrote:Osborne hasn't backed down. Some of the tax credit cuts will still be made and in the long-term they'll lose out with universal credit.

Which is what he was elected to do, he was elected to make the unemployed and non-Tory voters suffer. The more they suffer the more his supporters will cheer

His problem then was in making the employed and Tory voters also suffer.

That's where he may have a problem, but Tory voters (ie the biggest group in the country) elected a governemnt whose main policy was screwing those at the bottom. These voters will judge the government on how much they can make these groups suffer.

Not all Tory voters are total bastards, and there aren't enough of them to do what they like (only ~37% of the electorate). Last time round quite a lot of those votes were Lib Dems by inclination.

A party openly advocating making "those at the bottom suffer" aren't going to be elected.

Not all Tory voters are total bastards, and there aren't enough of them to do what they like (only ~37% of the electorate). Last time round quite a lot of those votes were Lib Dems by inclination.

A party openly advocating making "those at the bottom suffer" aren't going to be elected.

No not all are bastards but none put looking after the poor as a high priority and most are highly indifferent at best, in the same way no one votes Labour because they want to see a massive increase in defense spending (and yes Labour have done this in the past but its not the reason people vote for them).

The Tories didnt have to say openly screw the poor, merely we are going to cut benefits which is the same thing but a lot nicer way of saying exactly the same thing and allowing people to lie to themselves.

To put it bluntly a few single mothers committing suicide due to benefit cuts is not going to cost the Tories any votes

GrahamH wrote:A party openly advocating making "those at the bottom suffer" aren't going to be elected.

Er... they just were.

Beatsong wrote:

GrahamH wrote:A party openly advocating making "those at the bottom suffer" aren't going to be elected.

Er... they just were.

Sort of, but the pitch was more "we have to live within our means and we will make work pay".
They convinced people that would be affected by cuts that they were safe and got those votes.

Politicians are a lot more pleasant than me in their presentation of their policies which simply makes it easier for voters to kid themelves, the Tories stand for screwing the poor and anyone who voted for it either agrees with it or simply doesnt care

Word.