They think they’re onto a good thing after their suprise by-election victory, credited to the unpopularity of the expansion of London’s ultra low emission zone. Now watch as Rishi flyers with rolling back every single environmentally progressive policy of the last 50 years for a handful of votes.
Still, they’re onto a loser there. The environment and climate change is a big concern for voters these days, and frankly they’re already uncredible in that department. What little reputation they have will get easily be damaged.
I'm not so sure about that.
they care more about swing voters in swing constituencies - not people in general.
i think there are plenty of swing voters who might be mildly bothered about the environment, but many can be made to fear losing their cars more with the right rhetoric.
I think they'll bet that most of the people turned off by that were never going to flip to tory anyway.
I'd also not put too much stock in opinion polls on that matter - they're just not a very good measure. sure 50/60/70% of voters may say they care about the environment when asked a question with nothing at stake. but would they actually vote to get rid of their car or for higher fuel taxes; or even just to invest public money into public transport services.
@oo1@mondoman712@CouldntCareBear Yes but the stuff about ULEZ is largely fear-mongering. It will be completely irrelevant in a year's time. Most of the people worried about it won't actually be affected by it. And across London as a whole it's pretty popular.
There is plenty of historical experience across many countries on this. They're initially seen as possibly a good idea, then as it gets closer, people panic, then they get enacted, then people get used to them and mostly support them.
@oo1@mondoman712@CouldntCareBear As regards the wider picture, I agree that some demographics / constituencies have way more influence than others because of first past the post, and our politics diverges dramatically from what people actually think. People are much less cruel and bigoted, on the whole, than our current politics suggests. Politicians know this but only care about the marginal constituencies, or more often their own leadership ambitions in a soon to be smaller and out of office party.
Practically speaking, plenty of people drive because public transport isn't available or is expensive. A small investment in buses, combined with modest deterrents such as ULEZ, could shift a significant number of drivers. But to get to where we need to be - 70%+ fewer miles driven - we'll have to solve a lot of other problems e.g. housing, trains, etc.
Add comment