Categories
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Corbyn: Winning the election but losing the argument?
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Corbyn: Winning the election but losing the argument?
I’ve cast my vote and I’m pretty sure I’m backing a loser. I’m also fairly certain that we are winning the argument.By we I mean Paul Flynn and me (and a few others) who don’t believe Jeremy Corbyn is a credible Labour leader because he is unelectable as Prime Minister.
0
Comments
JC has drifted out a little bit on Betfair today: currently 1.44-1.45 compared with around 1.37-1.38 at lunchtime yesterday.
Last two times the YouGov polls were released to the public, there were major price moves before the poll was formally released.
Add in Peter Kellner's performance the other day....
The #LabourPurge is going to backfire - it only has value if it will change the outcome, in which case there will be complaints no matter who wins.
Labour Uncut have the measure of Jezza ... "The only thing Corbyn has been loyal to in the last 30 years is himself and his own political ideals, certainly not the Labour party."
A parasitic, not a symbiotic relationship.
A prefect leader.
Laid 1.37 last night and just matched backing 1.47
Also made me want Brown back.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-bristol-33999495
You may oppose austerity, cuts and anti-trade union laws but if don’t pose a real threat to the Tories you end up colluding with policies that will damage millions of people.
That's basically saying that the moderate, 'Blairite' Labour figures are wrong, and that by implication there's some alternative set of credible policies, distinct from the government's, which don't 'damage millions of people' (as the ludicrous hyperbole common in Labour circles has it).
Unfortunately if there is any such alternative, it doesn't seem to have been advocated by Andy, Yvette or Liz in any coherent form. You can see how people who've convinced themselves that reality is some kind of Tory plot will end up going for the one candidate who does actually claim to offer an alternative.
@TelePolitics: If Jeremy Corbyn is Labour's leader there may not be a way back http://t.co/uu9Yw2X8do
If they're going for JC they may as well go all in.
Yvette Cooper used to post on this site under the pseudonym snowflake5. Allegedly.
Other famous alumni include Louise Mensch. And whoever JackW is.
Re-election? No.
Ok, how about to become the PM? No.
Well he must have won an election to become Labour leader? Er, No.
But STILL better for Labour than Corbyn. Oh dear.
snowflake also stopped posting around the time TSE pointed out for the first time that Yvette would never prosper because she had almost certainly fellated Ed Balls....
...thereby forcing them into a coalition with the Liberal Democrats, and so helping to set up an outright win in 2015.
His failures dwarf other men's successes.
It will be unfortunate if the Labour party is reduced to that. We can all only hope something better comes out of ashes, ideally the sort of party that Southam Observer was describing this morning.
He could be right (often is). Don Brind appears to think that this Corbyn era will only lead to a GE election loss in 2020. But all these new hard left people and the engaged union ones have radically altered the Labour party, forever.
Associating with anti-semites and people that welcome the death of our soldiers is not something easy to wash away. The stains remain as Macbeth discovered. It is far far worse than the foolish Conservatives that tolerated the anti-gay elements. The nasty party smear could be mild compared to what is about to hit the Labour party. Throw in reselections, CLP takeovers, purges etc etc and the Labour party may not exist as a national party in the 2020s.
SpartacusYvetteHe may never be PM, or even Labour leader, but he’s certainly highlighted the unfitness of the other three candidates to govern the country.
What more can this utter shambles have in store?
That's how I look all of the time.
I was unaware that the strict ban on discussing such matters had been lifted...
He's checking it twice
And then he's gonna purge all you Trotskyites
Man-Del-Son is coming to town.
Imagine a Boris-Osborne-May-Truss contest. Boris is likely to wipe the floor with the others in terms of interest and buzz.
Says absolutely nothing about the fitness of the other three to govern.
The Conservatives have, and continue to use, the deficit as cover for implementing ideological policies to fundamentally change the role of the state - small government (eternal 'austerity'), unaffordable income tax cuts, increases to VAT, pension increases, increasing student fees, cutting student support etc.
Cutting the deficit and national debt has not remotely been a priority. Indeed, the national debt increased more under the first term under Osborne than it did under Darling, despite policies supposedly designed to cut the debt (e.g. the VAT increase, swathing government cuts)
The press, captured by the right, has failed to point out this obvious truth. This has allowed for the government to sound moderate by selling a lie while implementing a far-right agenda. The average person thinks 'austerity' has been used to cut the deficit - which is basically a lie.
The second reason is after the poor result in the last election, the route back to power doesn't seem clear. No party being able to govern seems like the most realistic target for Labour and thus Labour could do pretty well but the leader still wouldn't become Prime Minister.
But it is usually fairly easy for the admins to find out who posters are if we really care. (Which we don't, by and large.)
(If you wanted to give us no hints, then always access the site through Tor, and use a disposable email address.)
Why to vote Green @WhyToVoteGreen · 44s45 seconds ago
Never mind Tory-lite, how about Stalinism-lite?
#LabourPurge #Corbyn #ControlFreakery
Despite everything Lab would still be in a clear 2nd place and the opposition. It's hard to see who could overhaul Lab from the present position. Eventually the public will be looking for a change and Lab are the only realistic alternative
I think if all did an IQ test, IMO pbCOMers (past and present) with the highest IQ would be a toss between Snowflake and RodCrosby, with perhaps JackW challenging. Dr Nick Palmer is astronomically bright too, as is Tissue Price who I've met.
I've got straight A's at O's and A's three Masters degrees, have written two novels locked in drawers, financially self made, was a very young Director of Service at work- all done pretty effortlessly I must say (I wrote a highly scored and original 12,000 word MBA thesis- from to finish in 4 days) - and I have a such a ridiculously low IQ that I'm embarrassed to say.
The national debt has of course increased over that period, because the deficit had not, for most of that period, been cut to the point where the national debt began falling as a percentage of GDP. Starting from an 11% deficit, the government would have had to implement enormous tax rises/and or spending cuts, to reduce the debt to GDP ratio from day one. I don't know whether or not you're arguing in favour of such a policy.
Majorities < 20%: 97
Majorities < 30%: 152
Just because you don't know the difference doesn't mean the Tories are being ideological.
Wonder what the connection was there... On behalf of the Tory party?
http://www.gettyimages.co.uk/detail/news-photo/nigel-evans-arrives-at-cilla-blacks-funeral-at-st-marys-news-photo/484561502
Do you really believe that? The reductions in spending by the Coalition and this government are incredibly modest in real terms and keep real public spending way, way above where it was in the early noughties:
http://www.economicshelp.org/blog/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/government-spending-real-1967-2012.png
The real difference is that the absurd, unsustainable increases that were brought in by Brown have stopped but that was inevitable. A public sector used to such increases has not found this easy to cope with but to describe these inevitable changes as a "far right agenda" is frankly ridiculous.
I think if this was the 80's when the Trots were prepared to do the long yards to take control of the Labour party you could well be right.
But we are in the post naughties- to take over a constituency party requires effort. Many of the newbies who signed up for 3 quid- if they turned up to just one constituency meeting would be scared off.
This is the age of immediacy- social networking, the Voice. These new members will not have the staying power to change the fundamentals of the Labour party as a party that wants to govern.
All Labour is doing is having it's IDS moment. It needs to get it out of its system and thats that. All parties have these moments.
"But what if Labour's shift leftwards proves permanent? An influx of new members and activists from the Greens, TUSC, Stop the War, Respect, Hamas, ISIS, Plaid Cymru and the Khmer Rouge (Tamworth branch) will change the party forever. The members might never elect a centrist/centre leftist leader again. Meaning they will have no chance of ever winning a GE.
At some point the voters will seek an Opposition they CAN support, to replace the Tories, and if Labour look permanently unelectable....
I agree it is unlikely, but the death of Labour is far from impossible."
BTW, I don't think I've been purged. Yet.
Do you not realise how ludicrously inconsistent that is?
All it takes is an alternative, not even a particularly credible one, and the edifice can come tumbling down.
You think GDP has more than doubled between 2010 and 2015?
Cooper, Kendall, Burnham for leader (just a more rounded set of policies and arguments from Cooper on many things aside from ovaries)
Flint, Bradshaw, Eagle, Creasy for deputy (nothing against Creasy, but deputy leader in this environment is a road to nowhere so best leave it to those further into their careers).
It seems that Labour requires a good three thumping election defeats to get its mojo back. The 70's was different because both the Tories and Labour acted like two heavyweight boxers clinging onto each other in the last round of a punch fest- i.e. they were both sick, until Thatcher turned up.
My guess is that he will form a close partnership with Burnham. Together they will develop a distinctive leftish set of policies with a vivid story that challenges Osborne's narrative, and at the right moment, with Corbyn's support, Burnham will take over the leadership to fight the next General Election and become the next PM after Cameron. I'm on at 22 on Betfair.
https://twitter.com/standardnews/status/634363037638483970
It's not a tough concept to grasp:
1. Argue there's a need for deep austerity to cut the deficit
2. Implement swingeing cuts, while implementing large tax cuts and pension increases to ensure you fail to cut the deficit.
3. Return to 1.
Labour struggled to articulate this and the press had no interest in doing so. Reshaping government is ideological, yet the Conservatives never decided to argue their case, instead arguing the need for "austerity" and "cutting the deficit" instead, despite having little interest in balancing the books.
It's similar to policies by the GOP in the US, who run on a platform of 'fiscal competence' then cut taxes to unsustainable levels and run huge deficits to 'starve the beast'.
There's wishful thinking and then there is this.
https://twitter.com/GrainneMaguire/with_replies
But please: keep obfuscating as you are. The longer Labour have no economic credibility the better.
I want the Tories to stay in power.
In April 2015, Lewis became involved in a scandal when, in an interview for the New Statesman, he said (in jest), in response to a question on whether he was taking his upcoming victory for granted, he would only lose if he was "caught with [his] pants down behind a goat with Ed Miliband at the other end". He subsequently apologised for the remark, saying he was "sincerely sorry" if anyone had been offended by the comment.
That's not a gaffe, that's wonderful.
People want a smaller state with lower spending, they also want the deficit to be reduced. The Tories are providing them with a double win.
I can't understand the lefty outrage at the Tories enacting policies from their manifesto on which they got voted into power.
https://www.google.co.uk/webhp?sourceid=chrome-instant&ion=1&espv=2&ie=UTF-8#q=politicalbetting snowflake5
He/she also had a blog:
http://snowflake5.blogspot.co.uk/
It still seems bloody odd that a friend of Hamas could become Leader of the Opposition.
Spring time for UKIP? If Farage had toddled off it would be. Even with him, they have a perfect match for Corbyn's Labour when it comes to immigration.
That is not the profile of someone who offers unity.
@GrainneMaguire said Burnham reminded him of a haunted ventriloquist dummy...