You are reading a single comment by @hugo7 and its replies.
Click here to read the full conversation.
-
I think they are looking for what they see as economic prudence and relatively small government, although they would consider public services and social welfare essential. To me it doesn't make sense
There's a really good Reith lecture by some judge who discusses the expansion of the law. Not saying I'm against this (or its 100% accurate) but as an eg there are laws that prevent you from docking your dog's tail unless it's a working dog. That is government getting involved in quite a minor aspect of your personal property. Not supporting that sort of thing is not at all at odds with wanting public services and a welfare safety net.
hugo7
One person I know who said this recently (I was surprised) I would describe as progressive and socially liberal, very much not anti-woke. I think they are looking for what they see as economic prudence and relatively small government, although they would consider public services and social welfare essential. To me it doesn't make sense, but in their perception I think they are looking for 'decency' (not Conservative) and not ideology (not Labour). I think the people that historically voted Lib Dems probably fall into this camp more or less.