politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The latest PB/Polling Matters podcast: The YouGov LAB leade

System

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The latest PB/Polling Matters podcast: The YouGov LAB leadership poll with Sky political analyst Harry Carr

Keiran Pedley, a regular contributor of PB, is an elections and polling expert at GfK and tweets about politics at @keiranpedley

Read the full story here

peter_from_putney

First ..... again!

RobD

peter_from_putney said:

First ..... again!

Innocent_Abroad

I need more sleeo

JohnLoony

Go Fourth And Multiply!

Charles

Innocent_Abroad said:

I need more sleeo

What's sleeo?

Is that like cake?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z4f4oy2M_Og

[from 5:00]

Charles

@Innocent_Abroad

part 3 is better

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0g5kUBwVbCw

Robert_Of_Sheffield

My feeling is that many floating voters will approve of Corbyn in principle, because he has strong convictions, rather than just following the crowd, but they won't actually vote for Labour under him. Thus, his approval ratings will be misleadingly high.

Casino_Royale

@Charles - Bernard Ingham is the best!

David Amess doesn't surprise me. He's mad.

dr_spyn

Corbyn's pearls of wisdom from local rag in Bristol.

http://www.bristolpost.co.uk/Hundreds-come-hear-Labour-leadership-runner/story-27473604-detail/story.html

foxinsoxuk

Robert_Of_Sheffield said:

My feeling is that many floating voters will approve of Corbyn in principle, because he has strong convictions, rather than just following the crowd, but they won't actually vote for Labour under him. Thus, his approval ratings will be misleadingly high.

I think that may well be true, but he does have a certain charisma. Labour is looking for a sense of purpose and a soul after years of being run by New Labour SPADs. I can see that a bif of uncompromising, unspun outspoken leftism appeals quite a bit.

If Corbyn wins then his policies and platform may well do better than expected initially, particularly in both Wales and Scotland next year. His position on the referendum may well be more ambivalent than the other three, but if any deal involves a rolling back of the EUs social protections and human rights functions then I suspect that he would be on the side of the inners.

Yesterdays poll with Labour on 31%, LDs on 10% and Greens on 8% shows that there is a lot of residual support for the left, even if all are in a degree of turmoil at present.

Innocent_Abroad

foxinsoxuk said:

Robert_Of_Sheffield said:

My feeling is that many floating voters will approve of Corbyn in principle, because he has strong convictions, rather than just following the crowd, but they won't actually vote for Labour under him. Thus, his approval ratings will be misleadingly high.

I think that may well be true, but he does have a certain charisma. Labour is looking for a sense of purpose and a soul after years of being run by New Labour SPADs. I can see that a bif of uncompromising, unspun outspoken leftism appeals quite a bit.

If Corbyn wins then his policies and platform may well do better than expected initially, particularly in both Wales and Scotland next year. His position on the referendum may well be more ambivalent than the other three, but if any deal involves a rolling back of the EUs social protections and human rights functions then I suspect that he would be on the side of the inners.

Yesterdays poll with Labour on 31%, LDs on 10% and Greens on 8% shows that there is a lot of residual support for the left, even if all are in a degree of turmoil at present.

Depends what you mean by "a lot". I would suggest that those numbers mean that right-of-centre views predominate in shire England by 3:2 at least, possibly 2:1.

And my thanks to Charles for those clips - did I see Rolf Harris in there?

Financier

Regarding Obama's remarks about the strength of the unity of the EU. Does he realise that if Russia went to claim back the Baltic states plus most of its former eastern Europe countries, that the EU would take lots of committees to decide and disagree that it would just fold up as Russia advanced. Basically there is less united strength in the EU than in what remains in NATO.

foxinsoxuk

Innocent_Abroad said:

foxinsoxuk said:

Robert_Of_Sheffield said:

My feeling is that many floating voters will approve of Corbyn in principle, because he has strong convictions, rather than just following the crowd, but they won't actually vote for Labour under him. Thus, his approval ratings will be misleadingly high.

I think that may well be true, but he does have a certain charisma. Labour is looking for a sense of purpose and a soul after years of being run by New Labour SPADs. I can see that a bif of uncompromising, unspun outspoken leftism appeals quite a bit.

If Corbyn wins then his policies and platform may well do better than expected initially, particularly in both Wales and Scotland next year. His position on the referendum may well be more ambivalent than the other three, but if any deal involves a rolling back of the EUs social protections and human rights functions then I suspect that he would be on the side of the inners.

Yesterdays poll with Labour on 31%, LDs on 10% and Greens on 8% shows that there is a lot of residual support for the left, even if all are in a degree of turmoil at present.

Depends what you mean by "a lot". I would suggest that those numbers mean that right-of-centre views predominate in shire England by 3:2 at least, possibly 2:1.

And my thanks to Charles for those clips - did I see Rolf Harris in there?

I do not think him a realistic prime minister, but initially he may well do well. I agree that he will not do well in Middle England but there is always the possibility of events. A Conservativd party tearing itself apart over Europe, a fresh Middle East war or a fresh recession could all give Corbyn the support he needs to break a Conservative majority.

Casino_Royale

foxinsoxuk said:

Innocent_Abroad said:

foxinsoxuk said:

Robert_Of_Sheffield said:

My feeling is that many floating voters will approve of Corbyn in principle, because he has strong convictions, rather than just following the crowd, but they won't actually vote for Labour under him. Thus, his approval ratings will be misleadingly high.

I think that may well be true, but he does have a certain charisma. Labour is looking for a sense of purpose and a soul after years of being run by New Labour SPADs. I can see that a bif of uncompromising, unspun outspoken leftism appeals quite a bit.

If Corbyn wins then his policies and platform may well do better than expected initially, particularly in both Wales and Scotland next year. His position on the referendum may well be more ambivalent than the other three, but if any deal involves a rolling back of the EUs social protections and human rights functions then I suspect that he would be on the side of the inners.

Yesterdays poll with Labour on 31%, LDs on 10% and Greens on 8% shows that there is a lot of residual support for the left, even if all are in a degree of turmoil at present.

Depends what you mean by "a lot". I would suggest that those numbers mean that right-of-centre views predominate in shire England by 3:2 at least, possibly 2:1.

And my thanks to Charles for those clips - did I see Rolf Harris in there?

I do not think him a realistic prime minister, but initially he may well do well. I agree that he will not do well in Middle England but there is always the possibility of events. A Conservativd party tearing itself apart over Europe, a fresh Middle East war or a fresh recession could all give Corbyn the support he needs to break a Conservative majority.

If the Conservative party is divided over the EU that won't matter if the Labour Party is even more divided over its fundamentals.

Elections are about relative choices.

Innocent_Abroad

Financier said:

Regarding Obama's remarks about the strength of the unity of the EU. Does he realise that if Russia went to claim back the Baltic states plus most of its former eastern Europe countries, that the EU would take lots of committees to decide and disagree that it would just fold up as Russia advanced. Basically there is less united strength in the EU than in what remains in NATO.

The track record of Western leaders advancing on Moscow is not good. Perhaps President Trump would do better...

Casino_Royale

foxinsoxuk said:

Robert_Of_Sheffield said:

My feeling is that many floating voters will approve of Corbyn in principle, because he has strong convictions, rather than just following the crowd, but they won't actually vote for Labour under him. Thus, his approval ratings will be misleadingly high.

I think that may well be true, but he does have a certain charisma. Labour is looking for a sense of purpose and a soul after years of being run by New Labour SPADs. I can see that a bif of uncompromising, unspun outspoken leftism appeals quite a bit.

If Corbyn wins then his policies and platform may well do better than expected initially, particularly in both Wales and Scotland next year. His position on the referendum may well be more ambivalent than the other three, but if any deal involves a rolling back of the EUs social protections and human rights functions then I suspect that he would be on the side of the inners.

Yesterdays poll with Labour on 31%, LDs on 10% and Greens on 8% shows that there is a lot of residual support for the left, even if all are in a degree of turmoil at present.

I don't think that you can call the 10% that did vote for Nick Clegg's Lib Dems Left-wing.

He stood on a purely centrist platform. The left that didn't like it had already decamped.

foxinsoxuk

Financier said:

Regarding Obama's remarks about the strength of the unity of the EU. Does he realise that if Russia went to claim back the Baltic states plus most of its former eastern Europe countries, that the EU would take lots of committees to decide and disagree that it would just fold up as Russia advanced. Basically there is less united strength in the EU than in what remains in NATO.

Russia no longer has the power to do that. It cannot even afford to take a Russian speaking province off a weak Ukrainian army. The Baltics and Eastern Europe are now securely part of the Western Liberal Democratic system, they are not going to ever be controlled by Moscow again. It is the economic and social ties within the EU that will bind them to us, NATO helps hold the border, but it is the EU that wins hearts and minds.

logical_song

Casino_Royale said:

foxinsoxuk said:

Robert_Of_Sheffield said:

My feeling is that many floating voters will approve of Corbyn in principle, because he has strong convictions, rather than just following the crowd, but they won't actually vote for Labour under him. Thus, his approval ratings will be misleadingly high.

I think that may well be true, but he does have a certain charisma. Labour is looking for a sense of purpose and a soul after years of being run by New Labour SPADs. I can see that a bif of uncompromising, unspun outspoken leftism appeals quite a bit.

If Corbyn wins then his policies and platform may well do better than expected initially, particularly in both Wales and Scotland next year. His position on the referendum may well be more ambivalent than the other three, but if any deal involves a rolling back of the EUs social protections and human rights functions then I suspect that he would be on the side of the inners.

Yesterdays poll with Labour on 31%, LDs on 10% and Greens on 8% shows that there is a lot of residual support for the left, even if all are in a degree of turmoil at present.

I don't think that you can call the 10% that did vote for Nick Clegg's Lib Dems Left-wing.

He stood on a purely centrist platform. The left that didn't like it had already decamped.

Only 8% voted for Nick Clegg's LibDems.
The 10% in the poll are supporting Tim Farron's LibDems.
Whether you can count that in the 'Left' column is another matter.

PClipp

Casino_Royale said:

foxinsoxuk said:

Yesterdays poll with Labour on 31%, LDs on 10% and Greens on 8% shows that there is a lot of residual support for the left, even if all are in a degree of turmoil at present.

I don't think that you can call the 10% that did vote for Nick Clegg's Lib Dems Left-wing.
He stood on a purely centrist platform. The left that didn't like it had already decamped.

But this 10% is looking towards the future, Mr Royale, with Tim Farron as leader.

foxinsoxuk

Casino_Royale said:

foxinsoxuk said:

Robert_Of_Sheffield said:

My feeling is that many floating voters will approve of Corbyn in principle, because he has strong convictions, rather than just following the crowd, but they won't actually vote for Labour under him. Thus, his approval ratings will be misleadingly high.

I think that may well be true, but he does have a certain charisma. Labour is looking for a sense of purpose and a soul after years of being run by New Labour SPADs. I can see that a bif of uncompromising, unspun outspoken leftism appeals quite a bit.

If Corbyn wins then his policies and platform may well do better than expected initially, particularly in both Wales and Scotland next year. His position on the referendum may well be more ambivalent than the other three, but if any deal involves a rolling back of the EUs social protections and human rights functions then I suspect that he would be on the side of the inners.

Yesterdays poll with Labour on 31%, LDs on 10% and Greens on 8% shows that there is a lot of residual support for the left, even if all are in a degree of turmoil at present.

I don't think that you can call the 10% that did vote for Nick Clegg's Lib Dems Left-wing.

He stood on a purely centrist platform. The left that didn't like it had already decamped.

Sure. I am an Orange booker, and quite centrist myself. A Corbynite Labour party may do well in the cities and Scotland, with a LD revival in the Shires and Suburbs, particularly if the Tories run into trouble with the referendum, a war or a recession or even just infighting over succession.

Financier

Exam boards came under fire last night for making GCSE history questions too easy – after it emerged students are being asked ‘spot the difference’ questions.

One sample question allows pupils to get marks for history without having any historical knowledge.

Schools minister Nick Gibb said sample papers submitted by the exam boards were ‘far below’ the standard he expects. He attacked the boards for failing to raise standards and making questions too easy.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3172738/

Scott_P

@politicshome: Ken Livingstone: Tony Blair was "very lucky" to win 3 elections + was a "major reason" why Labour lost last election http://t.co/POu6nXI0PK

AlastairMeeks

Scott_P said:

@politicshome: Ken Livingstone: Tony Blair was "very lucky" to win 3 elections + was a "major reason" why Labour lost last election http://t.co/POu6nXI0PK

It's quite a while since Ken Livingstone won an election, mind.

Jonathan

Scott_P said:

@politicshome: Ken Livingstone: Tony Blair was "very lucky" to win 3 elections + was a "major reason" why Labour lost last election http://t.co/POu6nXI0PK

Clearly nutty. But interesting in respect that Livingstone is the only politician to have got the better of Tony Blair.

Financier

An undercover investigation has found that some NHS staff charge up to £15,000 to organise “advisory board” meetings for drugs companies.

Many of the meetings take place in five-star hotels around the world, with some attendees telling this newspaper that they were taken to “flashy” restaurants and paid large sums while considering whether to “switch” drugs.

Health service staff who take part in “advisory boards” for pharmaceutical companies argue that their involvement helps them to make “best use” of NHS money by analysing drugs and providing expert advice.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/nhs/11755878/NHS-bosses-paid-by-drug-firms.html

Chris123

Financier said:

Regarding Obama's remarks about the strength of the unity of the EU. Does he realise that if Russia went to claim back the Baltic states plus most of its former eastern Europe countries, that the EU would take lots of committees to decide and disagree that it would just fold up as Russia advanced. Basically there is less united strength in the EU than in what remains in NATO.

That's an outlandish scenario. We might as well talk about martians landing... Ukraine is a different situation because it isn't a historically grown state. What is now Ukraine historically belonged to the Polish Lithuanian Commonwealth or the Kievan Rus. Modern-day Ukraine is an invention that lacks a historical basis and a homogeneous population that identifies as a nation. Ukrainian nationalism originated in Western Ukraine where the population felt oppressed by the Poles (and Austro-Hungary). In Eastern Ukraine there was no nationalist movement - people spoke Russian and felt close affinity with Russia... Those that seek to split Ukraine and drive it into a Western or Eastern bloc are doing the country a great disservice. It cannot be either with the West or with Russia, it's got to be both. That's a reality dictated by the diverse makeup of the population. Unfortunately some politicians in Kiev ignored that and sought to impose themselves on the East... The Baltic states are a completely different scenario.

tlg86

Regarding Blair being lucky, the untimely death of John Smith worked out quite well for Blair.

DecrepitJohnL

Financier said:

Exam boards came under fire last night for making GCSE history questions too easy – after it emerged students are being asked ‘spot the difference’ questions.

One sample question allows pupils to get marks for history without having any historical knowledge.

Schools minister Nick Gibb said sample papers submitted by the exam boards were ‘far below’ the standard he expects. He attacked the boards for failing to raise standards and making questions too easy.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3172738/

The main difference is they've changed sides -- Pitt is speaking from what is now the Opposition front bench. When did that happen?

Casino_Royale

logical_song said:

Casino_Royale said:

foxinsoxuk said:

Robert_Of_Sheffield said:

My feeling is that many floating voters will approve of Corbyn in principle, because he has strong convictions, rather than just following the crowd, but they won't actually vote for Labour under him. Thus, his approval ratings will be misleadingly high.

I think that may well be true, but he does have a certain charisma. Labour is looking for a sense of purpose and a soul after years of being run by New Labour SPADs. I can see that a bif of uncompromising, unspun outspoken leftism appeals quite a bit.

If Corbyn wins then his policies and platform may well do better than expected initially, particularly in both Wales and Scotland next year. His position on the referendum may well be more ambivalent than the other three, but if any deal involves a rolling back of the EUs social protections and human rights functions then I suspect that he would be on the side of the inners.

Yesterdays poll with Labour on 31%, LDs on 10% and Greens on 8% shows that there is a lot of residual support for the left, even if all are in a degree of turmoil at present.

I don't think that you can call the 10% that did vote for Nick Clegg's Lib Dems Left-wing.

He stood on a purely centrist platform. The left that didn't like it had already decamped.

Only 8% voted for Nick Clegg's LibDems.
The 10% in the poll are supporting Tim Farron's LibDems.
Whether you can count that in the 'Left' column is another matter.

Yes, I know. But this is MoE stuff.

The point still stands. Farron has only just been elected leader, his support base is almost the same and his platform won't have fed through into any adjusted support base yet.

His column is not one you can confidently allocate to any political wing.

Casino_Royale

foxinsoxuk said:

Casino_Royale said:

foxinsoxuk said:

Robert_Of_Sheffield said:

My feeling is that many floating voters will approve of Corbyn in principle, because he has strong convictions, rather than just following the crowd, but they won't actually vote for Labour under him. Thus, his approval ratings will be misleadingly high.

I think that may well be true, but he does have a certain charisma. Labour is looking for a sense of purpose and a soul after years of being run by New Labour SPADs. I can see that a bif of uncompromising, unspun outspoken leftism appeals quite a bit.

If Corbyn wins then his policies and platform may well do better than expected initially, particularly in both Wales and Scotland next year. His position on the referendum may well be more ambivalent than the other three, but if any deal involves a rolling back of the EUs social protections and human rights functions then I suspect that he would be on the side of the inners.

Yesterdays poll with Labour on 31%, LDs on 10% and Greens on 8% shows that there is a lot of residual support for the left, even if all are in a degree of turmoil at present.

I don't think that you can call the 10% that did vote for Nick Clegg's Lib Dems Left-wing.

He stood on a purely centrist platform. The left that didn't like it had already decamped.

Sure. I am an Orange booker, and quite centrist myself. A Corbynite Labour party may do well in the cities and Scotland, with a LD revival in the Shires and Suburbs, particularly if the Tories run into trouble with the referendum, a war or a recession or even just infighting over succession.

To be honest, I lose track of what you are and am not sure you know yourself. You've been a modernising wet Cameroon, a Blairite and an orange book lib-dem whilst I've been on here.

Anyway, that's besides the point. A Corbynite Labour will not beat the Tories under any circumstances. They might, at best, strip it of a majority but will not knock it out of office.

Plato

"Are you a genius?"
"Yeah, I think I could become one"
"Perhaps you just have more genes that the rest of us?"
"Maybe"

Brilliant.

Charles said:

@Innocent_Abroad

part 3 is better
/www.youtube.com/watch?v=0g5kUBwVbCw

HenryGManson

Betting post: William Hills still have Tom Watson at 8/11 to be Labour's next Deputy Leader. It's as though they hadn't spotted the YouGov poll had figures for the deputy contest also. Under every indicator Tom looks the winner. Ladbrokes have him at a much more realistic 1/6 (I think 1/4 or 1/5 is the true chance).

Tom Watson has 66 Constituency Labour Party nominations compared to 36 for Creasy, 35 for Flint, 16 for Eagle and 14 for Bradshaw. http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/2015/07/which-clps-are-nominating-who-labour-leadership-contest

This is what YouGov said about Tom Watson's chances:
The race for deputy leader looks more clear-cut. Tom Watson is ahead with 42% of first preferences. This is slightly less than Corbyn’s first-preference 43%. However, Watson’s nearest challenger, Stella Creasey lags 21% behind; unless something astonishing happens, he looks unstoppable.
https://yougov.co.uk/news/2015/07/22/comment-corbyn-ahead-labours-leadership-contest/

Fill your boots on the 8/11 with Hills while you can.

Slackbladder

Jonathan said:

Scott_P said:

@politicshome: Ken Livingstone: Tony Blair was "very lucky" to win 3 elections + was a "major reason" why Labour lost last election http://t.co/POu6nXI0PK

Clearly nutty. But interesting in respect that Livingstone is the only politician to have got the better of Tony Blair.

He was also beaten by Boris twice in what should be a labour city.

TGOHF

tlg86 said:

Regarding Blair being lucky, the untimely death of John Smith worked out quite well for Blair.

Worked out well for Labour too - Smith wouldn't have won 3 in a row.

kle4

antifrank said:

Scott_P said:

@politicshome: Ken Livingstone: Tony Blair was "very lucky" to win 3 elections + was a "major reason" why Labour lost last election http://t.co/POu6nXI0PK

It's quite a while since Ken Livingstone won an election, mind.

I hope he stands for London mayor again, it would be great.

Plato

We could watch all the fun of his tax records - again! That was a hoot.

kle4 said:

antifrank said:

Scott_P said:

@politicshome: Ken Livingstone: Tony Blair was "very lucky" to win 3 elections + was a "major reason" why Labour lost last election http://t.co/POu6nXI0PK

It's quite a while since Ken Livingstone won an election, mind.

I hope he stands for London mayor again, it would be great.

tlg86

TGOHF said:

tlg86 said:

Regarding Blair being lucky, the untimely death of John Smith worked out quite well for Blair.

Worked out well for Labour too - Smith wouldn't have won 3 in a row.

Very much a what if moment.

Plato

@Charles - I had to stop watching Part 1 when Noel Edmonds came on all earnest - it was just too painfully embarrassing. I'd forgotten how cruelly funny and absurd BrassEye was. The Phil Collins paedo one was hide-behind-the-sofa awful.

OchEye

TGOHF said:

tlg86 said:

Regarding Blair being lucky, the untimely death of John Smith worked out quite well for Blair.

Worked out well for Labour too - Smith wouldn't have won 3 in a row.

Please Sir, can I borrow your crystal ball, I really need a good laugh.

kle4

Plato said:

We could watch all the fun of his tax records - again! That was a hoot.

kle4 said:

antifrank said:

Scott_P said:

@politicshome: Ken Livingstone: Tony Blair was "very lucky" to win 3 elections + was a "major reason" why Labour lost last election http://t.co/POu6nXI0PK

It's quite a while since Ken Livingstone won an election, mind.

I hope he stands for London mayor again, it would be great.

I just like the idea of him, whatever his strengths, not realising his time has come and gone and labour being unsure what to do about it. I don't know how he'll react if a Tory wins the city again, but I bet it'd be amusing, and since I don't care who wins London, the funniest outcome is what I'm looking for.

Slackbladder

Voodoo poll alert:

http://labourlist.org/2015/07/jeremy-corbyn-comes-first-among-labourlist-readers/

Plato

Unfortunately David Lammy doens't look like a winner. I really liked him after the London Riots - but his stupid twin brother keeps getting on the telly.

kle4 said:

Plato said:

We could watch all the fun of his tax records - again! That was a hoot.

kle4 said:

antifrank said:

Scott_P said:

@politicshome: Ken Livingstone: Tony Blair was "very lucky" to win 3 elections + was a "major reason" why Labour lost last election http://t.co/POu6nXI0PK

It's quite a while since Ken Livingstone won an election, mind.

I hope he stands for London mayor again, it would be great.

I just like the idea of him, whatever his strengths, not realising his time has come and gone and labour being unsure what to do about it. I don't know how he'll react if a Tory wins the city again, but I bet it'd be amusing, and since I don't care who wins London, the funniest outcome is what I'm looking for.

volcanopete

5,438 people voted in this week’s survey of Labour List.Here's the results.

http://labourlist.org/2015/07/jeremy-corbyn-comes-first-among-labourlist-readers/

logical_song

Casino_Royale said:

logical_song said:

Casino_Royale said:

foxinsoxuk said:

Robert_Of_Sheffield said:

My feeling is that many floating voters will approve of Corbyn in principle, because he has strong convictions, rather than just following the crowd, but they won't actually vote for Labour under him. Thus, his approval ratings will be misleadingly high.

I think that may well be true, but he does have a certain charisma. Labour is looking for a sense of purpose and a soul after years of being run by New Labour SPADs. I can see that a bif of uncompromising, unspun outspoken leftism appeals quite a bit.

If Corbyn wins then his policies and platform may well do better than expected initially, particularly in both Wales and Scotland next year. His position on the referendum may well be more ambivalent than the other three, but if any deal involves a rolling back of the EUs social protections and human rights functions then I suspect that he would be on the side of the inners.

Yesterdays poll with Labour on 31%, LDs on 10% and Greens on 8% shows that there is a lot of residual support for the left, even if all are in a degree of turmoil at present.

I don't think that you can call the 10% that did vote for Nick Clegg's Lib Dems Left-wing.

He stood on a purely centrist platform. The left that didn't like it had already decamped.

Only 8% voted for Nick Clegg's LibDems.
The 10% in the poll are supporting Tim Farron's LibDems.
Whether you can count that in the 'Left' column is another matter.

Yes, I know. But this is MoE stuff.

The point still stands. Farron has only just been elected leader, his support base is almost the same and his platform won't have fed through into any adjusted support base yet.

His column is not one you can confidently allocate to any political wing.

That's the point I was making.

Pulpstar

HenryGManson said:

Betting post: William Hills still have Tom Watson at 8/11 to be Labour's next Deputy Leader. It's as though they hadn't spotted the YouGov poll had figures for the deputy contest also. Under every indicator Tom looks the winner. Ladbrokes have him at a much more realistic 1/6 (I think 1/4 or 1/5 is the true chance).

Tom Watson has 66 Constituency Labour Party nominations compared to 36 for Creasy, 35 for Flint, 16 for Eagle and 14 for Bradshaw. http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/2015/07/which-clps-are-nominating-who-labour-leadership-contest

This is what YouGov said about Tom Watson's chances:
The race for deputy leader looks more clear-cut. Tom Watson is ahead with 42% of first preferences. This is slightly less than Corbyn’s first-preference 43%. However, Watson’s nearest challenger, Stella Creasey lags 21% behind; unless something astonishing happens, he looks unstoppable.
https://yougov.co.uk/news/2015/07/22/comment-corbyn-ahead-labours-leadership-contest/

Fill your boots on the 8/11 with Hills while you can.

Thanks Henry, got my allowed £13.75 on.

Plato

No second preference 40%, Andy Burnham 22%, Yvette Cooper 20%, Don’t know 10%, Jeremy Corbyn 4%, Liz Kendall 4%

volcanopete said:

5,438 people voted in this week’s survey of Labour List.Here's the results.

http://labourlist.org/2015/07/jeremy-corbyn-comes-first-among-labourlist-readers/

JEO

Plato said:

Unfortunately David Lammy doens't look like a winner. I really liked him after the London Riots - but his stupid twin brother keeps getting on the telly.

kle4 said:

Plato said:

We could watch all the fun of his tax records - again! That was a hoot.

kle4 said:

antifrank said:

Scott_P said:

@politicshome: Ken Livingstone: Tony Blair was "very lucky" to win 3 elections + was a "major reason" why Labour lost last election http://t.co/POu6nXI0PK

It's quite a while since Ken Livingstone won an election, mind.

I hope he stands for London mayor again, it would be great.

I just like the idea of him, whatever his strengths, not realising his time has come and gone and labour being unsure what to do about it. I don't know how he'll react if a Tory wins the city again, but I bet it'd be amusing, and since I don't care who wins London, the funniest outcome is what I'm looking for.

He supports pedestrianising Oxford Street, which would be enough for me to vote for him if I still had a vote.

foxinsoxuk

Casino_Royale said:

foxinsoxuk said:

Casino_Royale said:

foxinsoxuk said:

Robert_Of_Sheffield said:

My feeling is that many floating voters will approve of Corbyn in principle, because he has strong convictions, rather than just following the crowd, but they won't actually vote for Labour under him. Thus, his approval ratings will be misleadingly high.

I think that may well be true, but he does have a certain charisma. Labour is looking for a sense of purpose and a soul after years of being run by New Labour SPADs. I can see that a bif of uncompromising, unspun outspoken leftism appeals quite a bit.

If Corbyn wins then his policies and platform may well do better than expected initially, particularly in both Wales and Scotland next year. His position on the referendum may well be more ambivalent than the other three, but if any deal involves a rolling back of the EUs social protections and human rights functions then I suspect that he would be on the side of the inners.

Yesterdays poll with Labour on 31%, LDs on 10% and Greens on 8% shows that there is a lot of residual support for the left, even if all are in a degree of turmoil at present.

I don't think that you can call the 10% that did vote for Nick Clegg's Lib Dems Left-wing.

He stood on a purely centrist platform. The left that didn't like it had already decamped.

Sure. I am an Orange booker, and quite centrist myself. A Corbynite Labour party may do well in the cities and Scotland, with a LD revival in the Shires and Suburbs, particularly if the Tories run into trouble with the referendum, a war or a recession or even just infighting over succession.

To be honest, I lose track of what you are and am not sure you know yourself. You've been a modernising wet Cameroon, a Blairite and an orange book lib-dem whilst I've been on here.

Anyway, that's besides the point. A Corbynite Labour will not beat the Tories under any circumstances. They might, at best, strip it of a majority but will not knock it out of office.

I have voted for five different parties over the course of my political life, but mostly LD (inc previous incarnations), so have shifted between parties as the other one swung to extremes.

I too do not think Corbyn can win a majority, but it is quite possible to take one off the Tories.

JEO

Chris123 said:

Financier said:

Regarding Obama's remarks about the strength of the unity of the EU. Does he realise that if Russia went to claim back the Baltic states plus most of its former eastern Europe countries, that the EU would take lots of committees to decide and disagree that it would just fold up as Russia advanced. Basically there is less united strength in the EU than in what remains in NATO.

That's an outlandish scenario. We might as well talk about martians landing... Ukraine is a different situation because it isn't a historically grown state. What is now Ukraine historically belonged to the Polish Lithuanian Commonwealth or the Kievan Rus. Modern-day Ukraine is an invention that lacks a historical basis and a homogeneous population that identifies as a nation. Ukrainian nationalism originated in Western Ukraine where the population felt oppressed by the Poles (and Austro-Hungary). In Eastern Ukraine there was no nationalist movement - people spoke Russian and felt close affinity with Russia... Those that seek to split Ukraine and drive it into a Western or Eastern bloc are doing the country a great disservice. It cannot be either with the West or with Russia, it's got to be both. That's a reality dictated by the diverse makeup of the population. Unfortunately some politicians in Kiev ignored that and sought to impose themselves on the East... The Baltic states are a completely different scenario.

That's a bit of a rewriting of history. It was pro-Russian politicians in charge that decided to impose themselves on the West by cancelling the trade deal. That was what led to the protests. I have a colleague from the East (albeit not Luhansk or Donetsk) and she says support for Russia collapsed after Russia invaded. While she spoke Russian as her mother tongue she still identified as Ukrainian. It's like English speaking Scots not feeling English.

Sean_F

foxinsoxuk said:

Robert_Of_Sheffield said:

My feeling is that many floating voters will approve of Corbyn in principle, because he has strong convictions, rather than just following the crowd, but they won't actually vote for Labour under him. Thus, his approval ratings will be misleadingly high.

I think that may well be true, but he does have a certain charisma. Labour is looking for a sense of purpose and a soul after years of being run by New Labour SPADs. I can see that a bif of uncompromising, unspun outspoken leftism appeals quite a bit.

If Corbyn wins then his policies and platform may well do better than expected initially, particularly in both Wales and Scotland next year. His position on the referendum may well be more ambivalent than the other three, but if any deal involves a rolling back of the EUs social protections and human rights functions then I suspect that he would be on the side of the inners.

Yesterdays poll with Labour on 31%, LDs on 10% and Greens on 8% shows that there is a lot of residual support for the left, even if all are in a degree of turmoil at present.

Ipsos Mori tends to overstate the Greens, and understate UKIP, by about 3% in each case.

Broadly speaking, the Left took c.40% of the vote in May. Corbyn might very well take some support from the Greens and SNP, but he'd probably lose some of the 31% who voted Labour.

Sean_F

foxinsoxuk said:

Casino_Royale said:

foxinsoxuk said:

Robert_Of_Sheffield said:

My feeling is that many floating voters will approve of Corbyn in principle, because he has strong convictions, rather than just following the crowd, but they won't actually vote for Labour under him. Thus, his approval ratings will be misleadingly high.

I think that may well be true, but he does have a certain charisma. Labour is looking for a sense of purpose and a soul after years of being run by New Labour SPADs. I can see that a bif of uncompromising, unspun outspoken leftism appeals quite a bit.

If Corbyn wins then his policies and platform may well do better than expected initially, particularly in both Wales and Scotland next year. His position on the referendum may well be more ambivalent than the other three, but if any deal involves a rolling back of the EUs social protections and human rights functions then I suspect that he would be on the side of the inners.

Yesterdays poll with Labour on 31%, LDs on 10% and Greens on 8% shows that there is a lot of residual support for the left, even if all are in a degree of turmoil at present.

I don't think that you can call the 10% that did vote for Nick Clegg's Lib Dems Left-wing.

He stood on a purely centrist platform. The left that didn't like it had already decamped.

Sure. I am an Orange booker, and quite centrist myself. A Corbynite Labour party may do well in the cities and Scotland, with a LD revival in the Shires and Suburbs, particularly if the Tories run into trouble with the referendum, a war or a recession or even just infighting over succession.

I think the Lib Dems might well recover some ground in areas of historic strength. The problem for them is that their support simply collapsed in those areas in May. Seats which they had held, or run the Tories close, returned Conservative MPs with five-figure majorities. It will be a very long haul.

JonCisBack

Robert_Of_Sheffield said:

My feeling is that many floating voters will approve of Corbyn in principle, because he has strong convictions, rather than just following the crowd, but they won't actually vote for Labour under him. Thus, his approval ratings will be misleadingly high.

Could be something in that. I always had a much higher opinion of Tony Benn than Tony Blair, but disagreed with Benn on pretty much everything as opposed to only 3/4 of what blair said. He was consistent and seemed to be honest. Just wrong!

JonCisBack

Sean_F said:

foxinsoxuk said:

Casino_Royale said:

foxinsoxuk said:

Robert_Of_Sheffield said:

My feeling is that many floating voters will approve of Corbyn in principle, because he has strong convictions, rather than just following the crowd, but they won't actually vote for Labour under him. Thus, his approval ratings will be misleadingly high.

I think that may well be true, but he does have a certain charisma. Labour is looking for a sense of purpose and a soul after years of being run by New Labour SPADs. I can see that a bif of uncompromising, unspun outspoken leftism appeals quite a bit.

If Corbyn wins then his policies and platform may well do better than expected initially, particularly in both Wales and Scotland next year. His position on the referendum may well be more ambivalent than the other three, but if any deal involves a rolling back of the EUs social protections and human rights functions then I suspect that he would be on the side of the inners.

Yesterdays poll with Labour on 31%, LDs on 10% and Greens on 8% shows that there is a lot of residual support for the left, even if all are in a degree of turmoil at present.

I don't think that you can call the 10% that did vote for Nick Clegg's Lib Dems Left-wing.

He stood on a purely centrist platform. The left that didn't like it had already decamped.

Sure. I am an Orange booker, and quite centrist myself. A Corbynite Labour party may do well in the cities and Scotland, with a LD revival in the Shires and Suburbs, particularly if the Tories run into trouble with the referendum, a war or a recession or even just infighting over succession.

I think the Lib Dems might well recover some ground in areas of historic strength. The problem for them is that their support simply collapsed in those areas in May. Seats which they had held, or run the Tories close, returned Conservative MPs with five-figure majorities. It will be a very long haul.

Amazing stat of the night for me from GE2015 remains Somerton and Frome, where previously LDs held on tenaciously 3 elections in a row with a majority hovering around 1000 and Annunziata Rees-Mogg got (I think) the highest number of votes for a losing candidate at over 27K in 2010.

Now a tory majority >22K (twenty-two thousand) as the old videprinter would say!

Plato

Yowzer - that's enormous.

JonCisBack said:

Sean_F said:

foxinsoxuk said:

Casino_Royale said:

foxinsoxuk said:

Robert_Of_Sheffield said:

My feeling is that many floating voters will approve of Corbyn in principle, because he has strong convictions, rather than just following the crowd, but they won't actually vote for Labour under him. Thus, his approval ratings will be misleadingly high.

I think that may well be true, but he does have a certain charisma. Labour is looking for a sense of purpose and a soul after years of being run by New Labour SPADs. I can see that a bif of uncompromising, unspun outspoken leftism appeals quite a bit.

If Corbyn wins then his policies and platform may well do better than expected initially, particularly in both Wales and Scotland next year. His position on the referendum may well be more ambivalent than the other three, but if any deal involves a rolling back of the EUs social protections and human rights functions then I suspect that he would be on the side of the inners.

Yesterdays poll with Labour on 31%, LDs on 10% and Greens on 8% shows that there is a lot of residual support for the left, even if all are in a degree of turmoil at present.

I don't think that you can call the 10% that did vote for Nick Clegg's Lib Dems Left-wing.

He stood on a purely centrist platform. The left that didn't like it had already decamped.

Sure. I am an Orange booker, and quite centrist myself. A Corbynite Labour party may do well in the cities and Scotland, with a LD revival in the Shires and Suburbs, particularly if the Tories run into trouble with the referendum, a war or a recession or even just infighting over succession.

I think the Lib Dems might well recover some ground in areas of historic strength. The problem for them is that their support simply collapsed in those areas in May. Seats which they had held, or run the Tories close, returned Conservative MPs with five-figure majorities. It will be a very long haul.

Amazing stat of the night for me from GE2015 remains Somerton and Frome, where previously LDs held on tenaciously 3 elections in a row with a majority hovering around 1000 and Annunziata Rees-Mogg got (I think) the highest number of votes for a losing candidate at over 27K in 2010.

Now a tory majority >22K (twenty-two thousand) as the old videprinter would say!

MarqueeMark

volcanopete said:

5,438 people voted in this week’s survey of Labour List.Here's the results.

http://labourlist.org/2015/07/jeremy-corbyn-comes-first-among-labourlist-readers/

LOL at Andy Burnham - 6.6%!!

rottenborough

kle4 said:

Plato said:

We could watch all the fun of his tax records - again! That was a hoot.

kle4 said:

antifrank said:

Scott_P said:

@politicshome: Ken Livingstone: Tony Blair was "very lucky" to win 3 elections + was a "major reason" why Labour lost last election http://t.co/POu6nXI0PK

It's quite a while since Ken Livingstone won an election, mind.

I hope he stands for London mayor again, it would be great.

I just like the idea of him, whatever his strengths, not realising his time has come and gone and labour being unsure what to do about it. I don't know how he'll react if a Tory wins the city again, but I bet it'd be amusing, and since I don't care who wins London, the funniest outcome is what I'm looking for.

Livingstone's comment shows the depths of the brain freeze that is descending over Labour. Blair won by brilliant political positioning, iron discipline, communication etc etc.

TheWhiteRabbit

The sort of sea change the Lib Dems need in the south-west does happen - of course it does, it happened the other way - but you can't rely on it. Someone has to go out and make it happen. Probably under the nifty slogan #LibDemsforCorbyn

Sean_F

Plato said:

Yowzer - that's enormous.

JonCisBack said:

Sean_F said:

foxinsoxuk said:

Casino_Royale said:

foxinsoxuk said:

Robert_Of_Sheffield said:

My feeling is that many floating voters will approve of Corbyn in principle, because he has strong convictions, rather than just following the crowd, but they won't actually vote for Labour under him. Thus, his approval ratings will be misleadingly high.

I think that may well be true, but he does have a certain charisma. Labour is looking for a sense of purpose and a soul after years of being run by New Labour SPADs. I can see that a bif of uncompromising, unspun outspoken leftism appeals quite a bit.

If Corbyn wins then his policies and platform may well do better than expected initially, particularly in both Wales and Scotland next year. His position on the referendum may well be more ambivalent than the other three, but if any deal involves a rolling back of the EUs social protections and human rights functions then I suspect that he would be on the side of the inners.

Yesterdays poll with Labour on 31%, LDs on 10% and Greens on 8% shows that there is a lot of residual support for the left, even if all are in a degree of turmoil at present.

I don't think that you can call the 10% that did vote for Nick Clegg's Lib Dems Left-wing.

He stood on a purely centrist platform. The left that didn't like it had already decamped.

I think the Lib Dems might well recover some ground in areas of historic strength. The problem for them is that their support simply collapsed in those areas in May. Seats which they had held, or run the Tories close, returned Conservative MPs with five-figure majorities. It will be a very long haul.

Amazing stat of the night for me from GE2015 remains Somerton and Frome, where previously LDs held on tenaciously 3 elections in a row with a majority hovering around 1000 and Annunziata Rees-Mogg got (I think) the highest number of votes for a losing candidate at over 27K in 2010.

Now a tory majority >22K (twenty-two thousand) as the old videprinter would say!

Not unique either. Look at these Tory majorities, in seats that were lost by the Lib Dems in 2015

Taunton Deane 15,000; Solihull 13,000; Eastleigh 9,000.

Lost in 2010: SE Cornwall 17,000; Truro and Falmouth 14,000; Winchester 17,000; Romsey & Southampton North 17,500.

Lost in 2005: West Devon 18,000, Newbury 26,000!

TGOHF

OchEye said:

TGOHF said:

tlg86 said:

Regarding Blair being lucky, the untimely death of John Smith worked out quite well for Blair.

Worked out well for Labour too - Smith wouldn't have won 3 in a row.

Please Sir, can I borrow your crystal ball, I really need a good laugh.

Smith wouldn't have won one actually - the UK has rejected hard left wing governments for the last 40 years.

TOPPING

Agree with much that has been said - Corbyn might be out there bonkers but he is very clear on what he stands for and that is delighting CiF & labourlist, and actually many more besides, on the right and left.

And that is good for the country. As it seems clear that Andy, Yvette & Liz are not going to come up with a flagship policy (and yes it is possible to have one abiding theme this far out, which characterises your approach) then to have a clear demarcation of what Lab stands for (bonkers policies) will clarify politics for voters who complain about politicians all being the same.

And then, from that bonkers position, they can start again drifting to the right and stop somewhere that differentiates them but is electable.

At the moment, if Corbyn doesn't get in, I fear for Lab - not in terms of having a sensible approach but in terms of why bother electing them. Events notwithstanding, and as was shown in May, in 2020 it will be a case of "if it ain't broke..."

MarqueeMark

Another day when politics is dominated by Labour fighting like ferrets in a sack over the next captain of the Titanic....

logical_song

TGOHF said:

OchEye said:

TGOHF said:

tlg86 said:

Regarding Blair being lucky, the untimely death of John Smith worked out quite well for Blair.

Worked out well for Labour too - Smith wouldn't have won 3 in a row.

Please Sir, can I borrow your crystal ball, I really need a good laugh.

Smith wouldn't have won one actually - the UK has rejected hard left wing governments for the last 40 years.

John Smith, "hard left"? I suppose it depends on your viewpoint.

During Smith's tenure as leader the Labour party gained a significant lead in the polls over the Conservatives; on 5 May 1994, one week before Smith's death, the Conservatives suffered a major defeat in the British council elections, their worst in over 30 years. This happened in spite of the strong economic recovery and reduction of unemployment which had followed the declaration of the recession's end in April 1993.[5] Labour's opinion poll lead was shown to be as high as 23% in May 1994.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Smith_(Labour_Party_leader)

AlastairMeeks

The Lib Dems still don't seem to have any consciousness of what has happened to them. A uniform 5% swing would net them 16 seats. A 5% swing is pretty chunky of course. That also ignores the multiple fronts they're fighting on: they divide 10 Conservative seats, 3 Labour seats and 3 SNP seats. Oh, and there will very probably be boundary changes. Oh, and many/most of their former incumbents will not be fighting again next time.

In reality, the Lib Dems picking up five seats next time would be a good effort. And it's by no means impossible that they could lose seats next time. Three (Southport, Sheffield Hallam and Orkney & Shetland) all look to have serious challenges next time for different reasons.

TGOHF

Topping - Kendall started off the campaign with some strident policies which Labour members admit in polling could win elections - but she is booed at hustings.

It's not the clearness of the policies that makes Corbyn appealing to Labour types - it's the batshit mad purity of failed Marxism that appeals.

Like a team getting relegated playing "the right kind of football" rather than staying up with a four long ball approach.

How much do Labour want to be in power ? Not much - so why vote for them..

Chris123

JEO said:

Chris123 said:

Financier said:

Regarding Obama's remarks about the strength of the unity of the EU. Does he realise that if Russia went to claim back the Baltic states plus most of its former eastern Europe countries, that the EU would take lots of committees to decide and disagree that it would just fold up as Russia advanced. Basically there is less united strength in the EU than in what remains in NATO.

That's an outlandish scenario. We might as well talk about martians landing... Ukraine is a different situation because it isn't a historically grown state. What is now Ukraine historically belonged to the Polish Lithuanian Commonwealth or the Kievan Rus. Modern-day Ukraine is an invention that lacks a historical basis and a homogeneous population that identifies as a nation. Ukrainian nationalism originated in Western Ukraine where the population felt oppressed by the Poles (and Austro-Hungary). In Eastern Ukraine there was no nationalist movement - people spoke Russian and felt close affinity with Russia... Those that seek to split Ukraine and drive it into a Western or Eastern bloc are doing the country a great disservice. It cannot be either with the West or with Russia, it's got to be both. That's a reality dictated by the diverse makeup of the population. Unfortunately some politicians in Kiev ignored that and sought to impose themselves on the East... The Baltic states are a completely different scenario.

That's a bit of a rewriting of history. It was pro-Russian politicians in charge that decided to impose themselves on the West by cancelling the trade deal. That was what led to the protests. I have a colleague from the East (albeit not Luhansk or Donetsk) and she says support for Russia collapsed after Russia invaded. While she spoke Russian as her mother tongue she still identified as Ukrainian. It's like English speaking Scots not feeling English.

That's correct. But the new government (after they deposed Yanukovych) outlawed the Russian language and made some moves that alienated the population in the East. It's not a one-sided thing... Both sides (the Western faction and the pro-Russian faction) contributed to the escalation. One of the most recent mistakes was the Kiev government cutting all pensions, etc. for people living in the self-declared republics. I'm sure that endeared them to the locals. If their goal is to unify the country, then this does not help.

Pulpstar

antifrank said:

The Lib Dems still don't seem to have any consciousness of what has happened to them. A uniform 5% swing would net them 16 seats. A 5% swing is pretty chunky of course. That also ignores the multiple fronts they're fighting on: they divide 10 Conservative seats, 3 Labour seats and 3 SNP seats. Oh, and there will very probably be boundary changes. Oh, and many/most of their former incumbents will not be fighting again next time.

In reality, the Lib Dems picking up five seats next time would be a good effort. And it's by no means impossible that they could lose seats next time. Three (Southport, Sheffield Hallam and Orkney & Shetland) all look to have serious challenges next time for different reasons.

Does Hallam finally go Labour, or could it be one of the Conservative's greatest triumphs in 2020 ?

foxinsoxuk

antifrank said:

The Lib Dems still don't seem to have any consciousness of what has happened to them. A uniform 5% swing would net them 16 seats. A 5% swing is pretty chunky of course. That also ignores the multiple fronts they're fighting on: they divide 10 Conservative seats, 3 Labour seats and 3 SNP seats. Oh, and there will very probably be boundary changes. Oh, and many/most of their former incumbents will not be fighting again next time.

In reality, the Lib Dems picking up five seats next time would be a good effort. And it's by no means impossible that they could lose seats next time. Three (Southport, Sheffield Hallam and Orkney & Shetland) all look to have serious challenges next time for different reasons.

The Autumn conference will be interesting, but the May 2015 result has led to the party pulling together rather than pulling apart, at least that is my impression from the leadership hustings.

I do not think any LD thinks it will be an easy road back to be a substantial third party (or more), but that recognition that it will take a decade or longer has at least sunk in, unlike Labour.

Casino_Royale

Sean_F said:

foxinsoxuk said:

Robert_Of_Sheffield said:

My feeling is that many floating voters will approve of Corbyn in principle, because he has strong convictions, rather than just following the crowd, but they won't actually vote for Labour under him. Thus, his approval ratings will be misleadingly high.

I think that may well be true, but he does have a certain charisma. Labour is looking for a sense of purpose and a soul after years of being run by New Labour SPADs. I can see that a bif of uncompromising, unspun outspoken leftism appeals quite a bit.

If Corbyn wins then his policies and platform may well do better than expected initially, particularly in both Wales and Scotland next year. His position on the referendum may well be more ambivalent than the other three, but if any deal involves a rolling back of the EUs social protections and human rights functions then I suspect that he would be on the side of the inners.

Yesterdays poll with Labour on 31%, LDs on 10% and Greens on 8% shows that there is a lot of residual support for the left, even if all are in a degree of turmoil at present.

Ipsos Mori tends to overstate the Greens, and understate UKIP, by about 3% in each case.

Broadly speaking, the Left took c.40% of the vote in May. Corbyn might very well take some support from the Greens and SNP, but he'd probably lose some of the 31% who voted Labour.

I think it's the height of insanity for Corbyn supporters to take comfort from this given the psephological ineptitude of the 2010-2015 parliament, which went something like: take 1/2 of Lib Dem voters from GE2010, consider them left-wing, add them to Labour, and hey presto. We win on 35-39% without needing to lay a scratch on the Tories.

It's even more illogical to rely on non-voters and Greens now.

If the UK had compulsory voting, like Australia does, does anyone really think Miliband would have won?

Plato

I may be entirely wrong here, but given that LabourList is the organ of UNITE and the other big unions - it's likely that their readership is full of activists/trade unionist organisers.

That doesn't invalidate what they're saying - if anything, given the enormous push UNITE in particular is giving to Corbyn - such zeal may be pretty motivated to vote.

They could do to the election what UNITE did for EdM, just using OMOV instead.

TOPPING said:

Agree with much that has been said - Corbyn might be out there bonkers but he is very clear on what he stands for and that is delighting CiF & labourlist, and actually many more besides, on the right and left.

And that is good for the country. As it seems clear that Andy, Yvette & Liz are not going to come up with a flagship policy (and yes it is possible to have one abiding theme this far out, which characterises your approach) then to have a clear demarcation of what Lab stands for (bonkers policies) will clarify politics for voters who complain about politicians all being the same.

And then, from that bonkers position, they can start again drifting to the right and stop somewhere that differentiates them but is electable.

At the moment, if Corbyn doesn't get in, I fear for Lab - not in terms of having a sensible approach but in terms of why bother electing them. Events notwithstanding, and as was shown in May, in 2020 it will be a case of "if it ain't broke..."

Morris_Dancer

Good morning, everyone.

Just flicked P1 on. Perez has apparently had a pretty big crash (car upside down), but seems to be entirely ok.

FalseFlag

JEO said:

Chris123 said:

Financier said:

Regarding Obama's remarks about the strength of the unity of the EU. Does he realise that if Russia went to claim back the Baltic states plus most of its former eastern Europe countries, that the EU would take lots of committees to decide and disagree that it would just fold up as Russia advanced. Basically there is less united strength in the EU than in what remains in NATO.

That's an outlandish scenario. We might as well talk about martians landing... Ukraine is a different situation because it isn't a historically grown state. What is now Ukraine historically belonged to the Polish Lithuanian Commonwealth or the Kievan Rus. Modern-day Ukraine is an invention that lacks a historical basis and a homogeneous population that identifies as a nation. Ukrainian nationalism originated in Western Ukraine where the population felt oppressed by the Poles (and Austro-Hungary). In Eastern Ukraine there was no nationalist movement - people spoke Russian and felt close affinity with Russia... Those that seek to split Ukraine and drive it into a Western or Eastern bloc are doing the country a great disservice. It cannot be either with the West or with Russia, it's got to be both. That's a reality dictated by the diverse makeup of the population. Unfortunately some politicians in Kiev ignored that and sought to impose themselves on the East... The Baltic states are a completely different scenario.

That's a bit of a rewriting of history. It was pro-Russian politicians in charge that decided to impose themselves on the West by cancelling the trade deal. That was what led to the protests. I have a colleague from the East (albeit not Luhansk or Donetsk) and she says support for Russia collapsed after Russia invaded. While she spoke Russian as her mother tongue she still identified as Ukrainian. It's like English speaking Scots not feeling English.

Now that is rewriting history, it was the EU who proposed a deal that would have required the severing of ties with Russia and, as since the EU is integrated with NATO since the Lisbon Treaty, eventual membership of NATO . I don't know when this invasion you claim happened but Crimeans remain very happy and support for the current government in Kiev has collapsed. As much as I am sure your colleague is the font of all wisdom I would prefer to rely on academic experts, foreign policy analysts and say KISS opinion polling of attitudes in Ukraine.

Anyway with the collapse in support for the coup government, open conflict between Right Sector and Poroshenko, unrest amongst ethnic Rusyns in Transcarpathia, continuing defections from the UAF to the rebels with the collapse in moral it is rather a moot point. The US will continue strirring the pot but European concerns have long since shifted to the collapsing Ukrainian economy.

TCPoliticalBetting

Unite
They claimed a few weeks ago of already having 70,000 registered supporters with Labour.
Has the biggest telephone calling network of the Unions.
One centre at a Unite office in Islington had a reporter on a radio programme the other day of seeing 30 volunteers calling up "labour people" to register and support Corbyn. One centre!
FYI At the past few GEs it has been the Union call centres that have provided much of the volunteer resource for the labour party. It is now being used in an internal election.

Morris_Dancer

Hmm. Lotus aren't running, speculation it's due to money worries.

TCPoliticalBetting

foxinsoxuk said:

antifrank said:

The Lib Dems still don't seem to have any consciousness of what has happened to them. A uniform 5% swing would net them 16 seats. A 5% swing is pretty chunky of course. That also ignores the multiple fronts they're fighting on: they divide 10 Conservative seats, 3 Labour seats and 3 SNP seats. Oh, and there will very probably be boundary changes. Oh, and many/most of their former incumbents will not be fighting again next time.

In reality, the Lib Dems picking up five seats next time would be a good effort. And it's by no means impossible that they could lose seats next time. Three (Southport, Sheffield Hallam and Orkney & Shetland) all look to have serious challenges next time for different reasons.

The Autumn conference will be interesting, but the May 2015 result has led to the party pulling together rather than pulling apart, at least that is my impression from the leadership hustings.

I do not think any LD thinks it will be an easy road back to be a substantial third party (or more), but that recognition that it will take a decade or longer has at least sunk in, unlike Labour.

Farron's same sex issues continue to haunt him and he is being targeted by some LGBT activists. It will suppress LD support because the support the LDs are trying to attract are very pro-LGBT. Maybe unfair but it is a reality.

oxfordsimon

Pulpstar said:

antifrank said:

The Lib Dems still don't seem to have any consciousness of what has happened to them. A uniform 5% swing would net them 16 seats. A 5% swing is pretty chunky of course. That also ignores the multiple fronts they're fighting on: they divide 10 Conservative seats, 3 Labour seats and 3 SNP seats. Oh, and there will very probably be boundary changes. Oh, and many/most of their former incumbents will not be fighting again next time.

In reality, the Lib Dems picking up five seats next time would be a good effort. And it's by no means impossible that they could lose seats next time. Three (Southport, Sheffield Hallam and Orkney & Shetland) all look to have serious challenges next time for different reasons.

Does Hallam finally go Labour, or could it be one of the Conservative's greatest triumphs in 2020 ?

I suspect we will find that one out before 2020. Clegg won't last the full 5 years.

oxfordsimon

TCPoliticalBetting said:

foxinsoxuk said:

antifrank said:

The Lib Dems still don't seem to have any consciousness of what has happened to them. A uniform 5% swing would net them 16 seats. A 5% swing is pretty chunky of course. That also ignores the multiple fronts they're fighting on: they divide 10 Conservative seats, 3 Labour seats and 3 SNP seats. Oh, and there will very probably be boundary changes. Oh, and many/most of their former incumbents will not be fighting again next time.

In reality, the Lib Dems picking up five seats next time would be a good effort. And it's by no means impossible that they could lose seats next time. Three (Southport, Sheffield Hallam and Orkney & Shetland) all look to have serious challenges next time for different reasons.

The Autumn conference will be interesting, but the May 2015 result has led to the party pulling together rather than pulling apart, at least that is my impression from the leadership hustings.

I do not think any LD thinks it will be an easy road back to be a substantial third party (or more), but that recognition that it will take a decade or longer has at least sunk in, unlike Labour.

Farron's same sex issues continue to haunt him and he is being targeted by some LGBT activists. It will suppress LD support because the support the LDs are trying to attract are very pro-LGBT. Maybe unfair but it is a reality.

Have you seen his latest problems in this area?

http://order-order.com/2015/07/24/libdem-leader-sorry-over-tweet-comparing-gay-people-to-frogs/#_@/Xhsq0ZvlTq9mpg

People don't get their account hacked in this way. It is just not credible.

TOPPING

TGOHF said:

Topping - Kendall started off the campaign with some strident policies which Labour members admit in polling could win elections - but she is booed at hustings.

It's not the clearness of the policies that makes Corbyn appealing to Labour types - it's the batshit mad purity of failed Marxism that appeals.

Like a team getting relegated playing "the right kind of football" rather than staying up with a four long ball approach.

How much do Labour want to be in power ? Not much - so why vote for them..

Yes well as mentioned yesterday on here, we are at the anger stage so there is a lot of internal debate (ie none) atm.

Those supporting Corbyn, as you say, really do think that "one last push" will deliver a pure socialist country if only the electorate would see sense. But for others in Lab (and us), we appreciate his clarity. It will force Lab to define itself. That definition will be a million miles from Corbyn's vision but at present they are drifting dangerously.

It is pretty similar to the LibDems during the coalition - they were becoming featureless and rudderless and had a golden opportunity to define themselves but sadly no one grasped that nettle. Lab need to get grabbing. And Liz, Andy & Yvette (I am on Yvette at 3-1) seem unlikely to do that.

On the other hand, I have been trying to find a way to back Corbyn withdrawing. Although I think a Corbyn victory will eventually lead to Lab regeneration, he must look at the current chaos and ponder whether he is being too destructive.

TheWhiteRabbit

Morris_Dancer said:

Hmm. Lotus aren't running, speculation it's due to money worries.

Money worries?

Our money worries more like!!

TCPoliticalBetting

Would I be correct in thinking that one key difference for Labour back in the 1980s was that the largest Unions which funded Labour tended to have more centre left Leaders rather than the hard left ones that are now in place?

TheScreamingEagles

Plato said:

I may be entirely wrong here, but given that LabourList is the organ of UNITE and the other big unions - it's likely that their readership is full of activists/trade unionist organisers.

That doesn't invalidate what they're saying - if anything, given the enormous push UNITE in particular is giving to Corbyn - such zeal may be pretty motivated to vote.

They could do to the election what UNITE did for EdM, just using OMOV instead.

TOPPING said:

Agree with much that has been said - Corbyn might be out there bonkers but he is very clear on what he stands for and that is delighting CiF & labourlist, and actually many more besides, on the right and left.

And that is good for the country. As it seems clear that Andy, Yvette & Liz are not going to come up with a flagship policy (and yes it is possible to have one abiding theme this far out, which characterises your approach) then to have a clear demarcation of what Lab stands for (bonkers policies) will clarify politics for voters who complain about politicians all being the same.

And then, from that bonkers position, they can start again drifting to the right and stop somewhere that differentiates them but is electable.

At the moment, if Corbyn doesn't get in, I fear for Lab - not in terms of having a sensible approach but in terms of why bother electing them. Events notwithstanding, and as was shown in May, in 2020 it will be a case of "if it ain't broke..."

The editor of Labour list left to work for Liz Kendall's campaign, and past Labour list polls have indicated a healthy scepticism of the Unions involvement in the Labour Party.

So I don't think it is fair to say it is a otganof the Unions

oxfordsimon

TOPPING said:

TGOHF said:

Topping - Kendall started off the campaign with some strident policies which Labour members admit in polling could win elections - but she is booed at hustings.

It's not the clearness of the policies that makes Corbyn appealing to Labour types - it's the batshit mad purity of failed Marxism that appeals.

Like a team getting relegated playing "the right kind of football" rather than staying up with a four long ball approach.

How much do Labour want to be in power ? Not much - so why vote for them..

Yes well as mentioned yesterday on here, we are at the anger stage so there is a lot of internal debate (ie none) atm.

Those supporting Corbyn, as you say, really do think that "one last push" will deliver a pure socialist country if only the electorate would see sense. But for others in Lab (and us), we appreciate his clarity. It will force Lab to define itself. That definition will be a million miles from Corbyn's vision but at present they are drifting dangerously.

It is pretty similar to the LibDems during the coalition - they were becoming featureless and rudderless and had a golden opportunity to define themselves but sadly no one grasped that nettle. Lab need to get grabbing. And Liz, Andy & Yvette (I am on Yvette at 3-1) seem likely to do that.

On the other hand, I have been trying to find a way to back Corbyn withdrawing. Although I think a Corbyn victory will eventually lead to Lab regeneration, he must look at the current chaos and ponder whether he is being too destructive.

But one of the key things about a socialist revolution is that you have to destroy to rebuild in a pure way

TheScreamingEagles

Pulpstar said:

antifrank said:

The Lib Dems still don't seem to have any consciousness of what has happened to them. A uniform 5% swing would net them 16 seats. A 5% swing is pretty chunky of course. That also ignores the multiple fronts they're fighting on: they divide 10 Conservative seats, 3 Labour seats and 3 SNP seats. Oh, and there will very probably be boundary changes. Oh, and many/most of their former incumbents will not be fighting again next time.

In reality, the Lib Dems picking up five seats next time would be a good effort. And it's by no means impossible that they could lose seats next time. Three (Southport, Sheffield Hallam and Orkney & Shetland) all look to have serious challenges next time for different reasons.

Does Hallam finally go Labour, or could it be one of the Conservative's greatest triumphs in 2020 ?

Goes Labour for the first time ever.

Lib Dems in Hallam would rather nail their testicles to a tree than vote tactically for the Tories.

TheWhiteRabbit

oxfordsimon said:

TCPoliticalBetting said:

foxinsoxuk said:

antifrank said:

The Lib Dems still don't seem to have any consciousness of what has happened to them. A uniform 5% swing would net them 16 seats. A 5% swing is pretty chunky of course. That also ignores the multiple fronts they're fighting on: they divide 10 Conservative seats, 3 Labour seats and 3 SNP seats. Oh, and there will very probably be boundary changes. Oh, and many/most of their former incumbents will not be fighting again next time.

In reality, the Lib Dems picking up five seats next time would be a good effort. And it's by no means impossible that they could lose seats next time. Three (Southport, Sheffield Hallam and Orkney & Shetland) all look to have serious challenges next time for different reasons.

The Autumn conference will be interesting, but the May 2015 result has led to the party pulling together rather than pulling apart, at least that is my impression from the leadership hustings.

I do not think any LD thinks it will be an easy road back to be a substantial third party (or more), but that recognition that it will take a decade or longer has at least sunk in, unlike Labour.

Farron's same sex issues continue to haunt him and he is being targeted by some LGBT activists. It will suppress LD support because the support the LDs are trying to attract are very pro-LGBT. Maybe unfair but it is a reality.

Have you seen his latest problems in this area?

http://order-order.com/2015/07/24/libdem-leader-sorry-over-tweet-comparing-gay-people-to-frogs/#_@/Xhsq0ZvlTq9mpg

People don't get their account hacked in this way. It is just not credible.

Do you really think Farron, experienced political campaigner under fire for his previous comments on homosexuality, would have posted that?

I'm struggling either way.

Jonathan

TheScreamingEagles said:

Pulpstar said:

antifrank said:

The Lib Dems still don't seem to have any consciousness of what has happened to them. A uniform 5% swing would net them 16 seats. A 5% swing is pretty chunky of course. That also ignores the multiple fronts they're fighting on: they divide 10 Conservative seats, 3 Labour seats and 3 SNP seats. Oh, and there will very probably be boundary changes. Oh, and many/most of their former incumbents will not be fighting again next time.

In reality, the Lib Dems picking up five seats next time would be a good effort. And it's by no means impossible that they could lose seats next time. Three (Southport, Sheffield Hallam and Orkney & Shetland) all look to have serious challenges next time for different reasons.

Does Hallam finally go Labour, or could it be one of the Conservative's greatest triumphs in 2020 ?

Goes Labour for the first time ever.

Lib Dems in Hallam would rather nail their testicles to a tree than vote tactically for the Tories.

What type of tree?

TCPoliticalBetting

antifrank said:

The Lib Dems still don't seem to have any consciousness of what has happened to them. A uniform 5% swing would net them 16 seats. A 5% swing is pretty chunky of course. That also ignores the multiple fronts they're fighting on: they divide 10 Conservative seats, 3 Labour seats and 3 SNP seats. Oh, and there will very probably be boundary changes. Oh, and many/most of their former incumbents will not be fighting again next time.

In reality, the Lib Dems picking up five seats next time would be a good effort. And it's by no means impossible that they could lose seats next time. Three (Southport, Sheffield Hallam and Orkney & Shetland) all look to have serious challenges next time for different reasons.

With Farron being further left than Clegg, the only way they are going to win back seats is through some form of pact with Labour and the Greens. They cannot fight over the same leftie voters with Labour and the Greens. The field for NOTA is much more competitive than they have had for perhaps 100 years. Therefore they have to build support from "liberals" + "lefties" and then getting the NOTA voters once they are seen as the main contender in the seat.
Scotland looks like a dead zone for them because of the SNP also being left wing.

TOPPING

oxfordsimon said:

TOPPING said:

TGOHF said:

Topping - Kendall started off the campaign with some strident policies which Labour members admit in polling could win elections - but she is booed at hustings.

It's not the clearness of the policies that makes Corbyn appealing to Labour types - it's the batshit mad purity of failed Marxism that appeals.

Like a team getting relegated playing "the right kind of football" rather than staying up with a four long ball approach.

How much do Labour want to be in power ? Not much - so why vote for them..

Yes well as mentioned yesterday on here, we are at the anger stage so there is a lot of internal debate (ie none) atm.

Those supporting Corbyn, as you say, really do think that "one last push" will deliver a pure socialist country if only the electorate would see sense. But for others in Lab (and us), we appreciate his clarity. It will force Lab to define itself. That definition will be a million miles from Corbyn's vision but at present they are drifting dangerously.

It is pretty similar to the LibDems during the coalition - they were becoming featureless and rudderless and had a golden opportunity to define themselves but sadly no one grasped that nettle. Lab need to get grabbing. And Liz, Andy & Yvette (I am on Yvette at 3-1) seem likely to do that.

On the other hand, I have been trying to find a way to back Corbyn withdrawing. Although I think a Corbyn victory will eventually lead to Lab regeneration, he must look at the current chaos and ponder whether he is being too destructive.

But one of the key things about a socialist revolution is that you have to destroy to rebuild in a pure way

Yes exactly - now, Corbyn may well think that and be working towards it. However, I just wonder, as a seasoned politician whether he really (really) believes it.

kle4

FalseFlag said:

JEO said:

Chris123 said:

Financier said:

Regarding Obama's remarks about the strength of the unity of the EU. Does he realise that if Russia went to claim back the Baltic states plus most of its former eastern Europe countries, that the EU would take lots of committees to decide and disagree that it would just fold up as Russia advanced. Basically there is less united strength in the EU than in what remains in NATO.

That's an outlandish scenario. We might as well talk about martians landing... Ukraine is a different situation because it isn't a historically grown state. What is now Ukraine historically belonged to the Polish Lithuanian Commonwealth or the Kievan Rus. Modern-day Ukraine is an invention that lacks a historical basis and a homogeneous population that identifies as a nation. Ukrainian nationalism originated in Western Ukraine where the population felt oppressed by the Poles (and Austro-Hungary). In Eastern Ukraine there was no nationalist movement - people spoke Russian and felt close affinity with Russia... Those that seek to split Ukraine and drive it into a Western or Eastern bloc are doing the country a great disservice. It cannot be either with the West or with Russia, it's got to be both. That's a reality dictated by the diverse makeup of the population. Unfortunately some politicians in Kiev ignored that and sought to impose themselves on the East... The Baltic states are a completely different scenario.

That's a bit of a rewriting of history. It was pro-Russian politicians in charge that decided to impose themselves on the West by cancelling the trade deal. That was what led to the protests. I have a colleague from the East (albeit not Luhansk or Donetsk) and she says support for Russia collapsed after Russia invaded. While she spoke Russian as her mother tongue she still identified as Ukrainian. It's like English speaking Scots not feeling English.

it was the EU who proposed a deal that would have required the severing of ties with Russia

While I dislike the EU, to play devil's advocate, even if they proposed such a deal, more responsibility falls on people who accept a deal than propose it, so long as it is not forced from the proposer

Jonathan

Morris_Dancer said:

Hmm. Lotus aren't running, speculation it's due to money worries.

It could be a dodgy alternator. An ex colleague was forever having problems with his Lotus' electrics.

TheScreamingEagles

Jonathan said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Pulpstar said:

antifrank said:

The Lib Dems still don't seem to have any consciousness of what has happened to them. A uniform 5% swing would net them 16 seats. A 5% swing is pretty chunky of course. That also ignores the multiple fronts they're fighting on: they divide 10 Conservative seats, 3 Labour seats and 3 SNP seats. Oh, and there will very probably be boundary changes. Oh, and many/most of their former incumbents will not be fighting again next time.

In reality, the Lib Dems picking up five seats next time would be a good effort. And it's by no means impossible that they could lose seats next time. Three (Southport, Sheffield Hallam and Orkney & Shetland) all look to have serious challenges next time for different reasons.

Does Hallam finally go Labour, or could it be one of the Conservative's greatest triumphs in 2020 ?

Goes Labour for the first time ever.

Lib Dems in Hallam would rather nail their testicles to a tree than vote tactically for the Tories.

What type of tree?

Any tree will do.

They are annoyed at the way the Tories cannibalised them at the election

oxfordsimon

TheWhiteRabbit said:

oxfordsimon said:

TCPoliticalBetting said:

foxinsoxuk said:

antifrank said:

The Lib Dems still don't seem to have any consciousness of what has happened to them. A uniform 5% swing would net them 16 seats. A 5% swing is pretty chunky of course. That also ignores the multiple fronts they're fighting on: they divide 10 Conservative seats, 3 Labour seats and 3 SNP seats. Oh, and there will very probably be boundary changes. Oh, and many/most of their former incumbents will not be fighting again next time.

In reality, the Lib Dems picking up five seats next time would be a good effort. And it's by no means impossible that they could lose seats next time. Three (Southport, Sheffield Hallam and Orkney & Shetland) all look to have serious challenges next time for different reasons.

The Autumn conference will be interesting, but the May 2015 result has led to the party pulling together rather than pulling apart, at least that is my impression from the leadership hustings.

I do not think any LD thinks it will be an easy road back to be a substantial third party (or more), but that recognition that it will take a decade or longer has at least sunk in, unlike Labour.

Farron's same sex issues continue to haunt him and he is being targeted by some LGBT activists. It will suppress LD support because the support the LDs are trying to attract are very pro-LGBT. Maybe unfair but it is a reality.

Have you seen his latest problems in this area?

http://order-order.com/2015/07/24/libdem-leader-sorry-over-tweet-comparing-gay-people-to-frogs/#_@/Xhsq0ZvlTq9mpg

People don't get their account hacked in this way. It is just not credible.

Do you really think Farron, experienced political campaigner under fire for his previous comments on homosexuality, would have posted that?

I'm struggling either way.

But no hacker would behave in that way. It is so specific. And only one post. Doesn't ring true.

Plato

I got a random rude tweet from Simon Danczuk the other day calling me a bigot - I think he got the wrong end of the stick since I was agreeing with him/or he was tired and emotional as it made no sense.

oxfordsimon said:

TCPoliticalBetting said:

foxinsoxuk said:

antifrank said:

The Lib Dems still don't seem to have any consciousness of what has happened to them. A uniform 5% swing would net them 16 seats. A 5% swing is pretty chunky of course. That also ignores the multiple fronts they're fighting on: they divide 10 Conservative seats, 3 Labour seats and 3 SNP seats. Oh, and there will very probably be boundary changes. Oh, and many/most of their former incumbents will not be fighting again next time.

In reality, the Lib Dems picking up five seats next time would be a good effort. And it's by no means impossible that they could lose seats next time. Three (Southport, Sheffield Hallam and Orkney & Shetland) all look to have serious challenges next time for different reasons.

The Autumn conference will be interesting, but the May 2015 result has led to the party pulling together rather than pulling apart, at least that is my impression from the leadership hustings.

I do not think any LD thinks it will be an easy road back to be a substantial third party (or more), but that recognition that it will take a decade or longer has at least sunk in, unlike Labour.

Farron's same sex issues continue to haunt him and he is being targeted by some LGBT activists. It will suppress LD support because the support the LDs are trying to attract are very pro-LGBT. Maybe unfair but it is a reality.

Have you seen his latest problems in this area?

http://order-order.com/2015/07/24/libdem-leader-sorry-over-tweet-comparing-gay-people-to-frogs/#_@/Xhsq0ZvlTq9mpg

People don't get their account hacked in this way. It is just not credible.

TCPoliticalBetting

oxfordsimon said:

TCPoliticalBetting said:

foxinsoxuk said:

antifrank said:

The Lib Dems still don't seem to have any consciousness of what has happened to them. A uniform 5% swing would net them 16 seats. A 5% swing is pretty chunky of course. That also ignores the multiple fronts they're fighting on: they divide 10 Conservative seats, 3 Labour seats and 3 SNP seats. Oh, and there will very probably be boundary changes. Oh, and many/most of their former incumbents will not be fighting again next time.

In reality, the Lib Dems picking up five seats next time would be a good effort. And it's by no means impossible that they could lose seats next time. Three (Southport, Sheffield Hallam and Orkney & Shetland) all look to have serious challenges next time for different reasons.

The Autumn conference will be interesting, but the May 2015 result has led to the party pulling together rather than pulling apart, at least that is my impression from the leadership hustings.

I do not think any LD thinks it will be an easy road back to be a substantial third party (or more), but that recognition that it will take a decade or longer has at least sunk in, unlike Labour.

Farron's same sex issues continue to haunt him and he is being targeted by some LGBT activists. It will suppress LD support because the support the LDs are trying to attract are very pro-LGBT. Maybe unfair but it is a reality.

Have you seen his latest problems in this area?

http://order-order.com/2015/07/24/libdem-leader-sorry-over-tweet-comparing-gay-people-to-frogs/#_@/Xhsq0ZvlTq9mpg

People don't get their account hacked in this way. It is just not credible.

I did and was loathe to do so at risk of upsetting the sensitivities of our LD posters on here. Some of whom think that Farron can feed 5,000 with a bit of bread and fish.

TheWhiteRabbit

oxfordsimon said:

TheWhiteRabbit said:

oxfordsimon said:

TCPoliticalBetting said:

foxinsoxuk said:

antifrank said:

The Lib Dems still don't seem to have any consciousness of what has happened to them. A uniform 5% swing would net them 16 seats. A 5% swing is pretty chunky of course. That also ignores the multiple fronts they're fighting on: they divide 10 Conservative seats, 3 Labour seats and 3 SNP seats. Oh, and there will very probably be boundary changes. Oh, and many/most of their former incumbents will not be fighting again next time.

In reality, the Lib Dems picking up five seats next time would be a good effort. And it's by no means impossible that they could lose seats next time. Three (Southport, Sheffield Hallam and Orkney & Shetland) all look to have serious challenges next time for different reasons.

The Autumn conference will be interesting, but the May 2015 result has led to the party pulling together rather than pulling apart, at least that is my impression from the leadership hustings.

I do not think any LD thinks it will be an easy road back to be a substantial third party (or more), but that recognition that it will take a decade or longer has at least sunk in, unlike Labour.

Farron's same sex issues continue to haunt him and he is being targeted by some LGBT activists. It will suppress LD support because the support the LDs are trying to attract are very pro-LGBT. Maybe unfair but it is a reality.

Have you seen his latest problems in this area?

http://order-order.com/2015/07/24/libdem-leader-sorry-over-tweet-comparing-gay-people-to-frogs/#_@/Xhsq0ZvlTq9mpg

People don't get their account hacked in this way. It is just not credible.

Do you really think Farron, experienced political campaigner under fire for his previous comments on homosexuality, would have posted that?

I'm struggling either way.

But no hacker would behave in that way. It is so specific. And only one post. Doesn't ring true.

Maybe the hacker realised what it would look like. After all, he will have been hacked (if at all) for political reasons, not to push some investment scheme. Maybe the other user was a member of his family, accidentally; or a member of his campaign team thoughtlessly.

JonCisBack

Sean_F said:

Plato said:

Yowzer - that's enormous.

JonCisBack said:

Sean_F said:

foxinsoxuk said:

Casino_Royale said:

foxinsoxuk said:

Robert_Of_Sheffield said:

My feeling is that many floating voters will approve of Corbyn in principle, because he has strong convictions, rather than just following the crowd, but they won't actually vote for Labour under him. Thus, his approval ratings will be misleadingly high.

I think that may well be true, but he does have a certain charisma. Labour is looking for a sense of purpose and a soul after years of being run by New Labour SPADs. I can see that a bif of uncompromising, unspun outspoken leftism appeals quite a bit.

If Corbyn wins then his policies and platform may well do better than expected initially, particularly in both Wales and Scotland next year. His position on the referendum may well be more ambivalent than the other three, but if any deal involves a rolling back of the EUs social protections and human rights functions then I suspect that he would be on the side of the inners.

Yesterdays poll with Labour on 31%, LDs on 10% and Greens on 8% shows that there is a lot of residual support for the left, even if all are in a degree of turmoil at present.

I don't think that you can call the 10% that did vote for Nick Clegg's Lib Dems Left-wing.

He stood on a purely centrist platform. The left that didn't like it had already decamped.

I think the Lib Dems might well recover some ground in areas of historic strength. The problem for them is that their support simply collapsed in those areas in May. Seats which they had held, or run the Tories close, returned Conservative MPs with five-figure majorities. It will be a very long haul.

Amazing stat of the night for me from GE2015 remains Somerton and Frome, where previously LDs held on tenaciously 3 elections in a row with a majority hovering around 1000 and Annunziata Rees-Mogg got (I think) the highest number of votes for a losing candidate at over 27K in 2010.

Now a tory majority >22K (twenty-two thousand) as the old videprinter would say!

Not unique either. Look at these Tory majorities, in seats that were lost by the Lib Dems in 2015

Taunton Deane 15,000; Solihull 13,000; Eastleigh 9,000.

Lost in 2010: SE Cornwall 17,000; Truro and Falmouth 14,000; Winchester 17,000; Romsey & Southampton North 17,500.

Lost in 2005: West Devon 18,000, Newbury 26,000!

Yes newbury is amazing too - LDs won that in a by-election didn't they originally?

Never mind, the charismatic and handsome farron will turn it all around. ahem

kle4

rottenborough said:

kle4 said:

Plato said:

We could watch all the fun of his tax records - again! That was a hoot.

kle4 said:

antifrank said:

Scott_P said:

@politicshome: Ken Livingstone: Tony Blair was "very lucky" to win 3 elections + was a "major reason" why Labour lost last election http://t.co/POu6nXI0PK

It's quite a while since Ken Livingstone won an election, mind.

I hope he stands for London mayor again, it would be great.

I just like the idea of him, whatever his strengths, not realising his time has come and gone and labour being unsure what to do about it. I don't know how he'll react if a Tory wins the city again, but I bet it'd be amusing, and since I don't care who wins London, the funniest outcome is what I'm looking for.

Livingstone's comment shows the depths of the brain freeze that is descending over Labour. Blair won by brilliant political positioning, iron discipline, communication etc etc.

It does seem a little unfair in the least - one does not win 3 times purely through luck and poor opposition. Once or twice perhaps, but not 3 times.

TheWhiteRabbit said:

The sort of sea change the Lib Dems need in the south-west does happen - of course it does, it happened the other way - but you can't rely on it. Someone has to go out and make it happen. Probably under the nifty slogan #LibDemsforCorbyn

Worth a try I suppose. I do think an actually 'scary' (to woolly liberal types who are now Blue Liberals) Tory leader could see a marked change in LD fortunes in the SW, where I think the fact Cameron was so derided at times from his own right wing and seemingly happy to coalition with the LDs, made him and the Tories much more appealing, the party they wanted in the first place rather than the more liberal, in theory, LDs. I don't see any particularly frightening Tories on the horizon, but there are some crap ones, that could work too I guess.

JEO

TheWhiteRabbit said:

oxfordsimon said:

TCPoliticalBetting said:

foxinsoxuk said:

antifrank said:

The Lib Dems still don't seem to have any consciousness of what has happened to them. A uniform 5% swing would net them 16 seats. A 5% swing is pretty chunky of course. That also ignores the multiple fronts they're fighting on: they divide 10 Conservative seats, 3 Labour seats and 3 SNP seats. Oh, and there will very probably be boundary changes. Oh, and many/most of their former incumbents will not be fighting again next time.

In reality, the Lib Dems picking up five seats next time would be a good effort. And it's by no means impossible that they could lose seats next time. Three (Southport, Sheffield Hallam and Orkney & Shetland) all look to have serious challenges next time for different reasons.

The Autumn conference will be interesting, but the May 2015 result has led to the party pulling together rather than pulling apart, at least that is my impression from the leadership hustings.

I do not think any LD thinks it will be an easy road back to be a substantial third party (or more), but that recognition that it will take a decade or longer has at least sunk in, unlike Labour.

Farron's same sex issues continue to haunt him and he is being targeted by some LGBT activists. It will suppress LD support because the support the LDs are trying to attract are very pro-LGBT. Maybe unfair but it is a reality.

Have you seen his latest problems in this area?

http://order-order.com/2015/07/24/libdem-leader-sorry-over-tweet-comparing-gay-people-to-frogs/#_@/Xhsq0ZvlTq9mpg

People don't get their account hacked in this way. It is just not credible.

Do you really think Farron, experienced political campaigner under fire for his previous comments on homosexuality, would have posted that?

I'm struggling either way.

Do you really believe that someone who has hacked into his account would limit their malicious tweeting to a single tweet discussing chemical leaching in frogs?

Farron is a very good campaigner but his frame of reference is rural Cumbria. He is still adjusting to the national stage, and doesn't realise that the more urban, metropolitan electorate at the national level gets upset over this sort of thing.

Morris_Dancer

Mr. Jonathan, a fair point, the Lotus has been breaking down a lot this year (sometimes to profitable effect ).

Pulpstar

TCPoliticalBetting said:

oxfordsimon said:

TCPoliticalBetting said:

foxinsoxuk said:

antifrank said:

The Lib Dems still don't seem to have any consciousness of what has happened to them. A uniform 5% swing would net them 16 seats. A 5% swing is pretty chunky of course. That also ignores the multiple fronts they're fighting on: they divide 10 Conservative seats, 3 Labour seats and 3 SNP seats. Oh, and there will very probably be boundary changes. Oh, and many/most of their former incumbents will not be fighting again next time.

In reality, the Lib Dems picking up five seats next time would be a good effort. And it's by no means impossible that they could lose seats next time. Three (Southport, Sheffield Hallam and Orkney & Shetland) all look to have serious challenges next time for different reasons.

The Autumn conference will be interesting, but the May 2015 result has led to the party pulling together rather than pulling apart, at least that is my impression from the leadership hustings.

I do not think any LD thinks it will be an easy road back to be a substantial third party (or more), but that recognition that it will take a decade or longer has at least sunk in, unlike Labour.

Farron's same sex issues continue to haunt him and he is being targeted by some LGBT activists. It will suppress LD support because the support the LDs are trying to attract are very pro-LGBT. Maybe unfair but it is a reality.

Have you seen his latest problems in this area?

http://order-order.com/2015/07/24/libdem-leader-sorry-over-tweet-comparing-gay-people-to-frogs/#_@/Xhsq0ZvlTq9mpg

People don't get their account hacked in this way. It is just not credible.

I did and was loathe to do so at risk of upsetting the sensitivities of our LD posters on here. Some of whom think that Farron can feed 5,000 with a bit of bread and fish.

If he'd have been hacked then he'd be advertising a quick $10,000 a month from home rather than going on about gays and frogs.

Plato

Yes, they stopped Labour losing their marbles. Now some actively encouraging it.

That was all in the public domain. What was not known was the reaction of a group of long-standing, moderate, brave and far-sighted trade union leaders who believed that the party could not fulfil its role of getting trade unionists into parliament if it became unelectable. They decided to use their block votes to change the composition of the hard left NEC as a precondition for ‘saving’ the Labour party and making it an electoral force again...

The fledging, secret, trade union gathering – named the St Ermin’s Group after the hotel where it met – knew that it had to defeat this challenge, or risk a greater defection of MPs to the SDP which was riding high in the polls.

Nifty, intelligent footwork not only saw Healey re-elected, albeit by a tiny margin, but also saw moderates gain five NEC seats, the unions controlling the women’s seats in addition to the union places. This was only the start. Each year, seat by seat, a moderate majority was created on the NEC so that after Kinnock’s election as leader in 1983 he had an executive committee which backed rather than opposed his changes and, in particular, stood solid behind him during his 1985 Bournemouth speech in which he attacked Militant.

http://www.progressonline.org.uk/2013/11/14/how-the-unions-saved-labour/

TCPoliticalBetting said:

Would I be correct in thinking that one key difference for Labour back in the 1980s was that the largest Unions which funded Labour tended to have more centre left Leaders rather than the hard left ones that are now in place?

kle4

Morris_Dancer said:

Hmm. Lotus aren't running, speculation it's due to money worries.

I'm sure it's more expensive than ever to run a team in F1, but come on Lotus, Minardi managed to keep going for 20 years on what amounted to pocket change.