Why do posh people have such a dim view of grammar schools?
Maybe it's because they subconsciously (or otherwise) realise they might represent a threat to their own position and that of their children. Clever children from ordinary backgrounds treading on their territory.
Except that what happens in most grammar school areas is that middle class parents celebrate their luck in not having to pay school fees, while kids of poorer families (who can't afford to have their kids tutored) lose out.
I live close to the excellent Henrietta Barnett school, and I hope my daughter gets in on the 11-plus to get there. In fact, I suspect all the girls from my daughter's incredibly expensive prep school will be applying there.
But just 23 kids in the whole of Henrietta Barnett get free school meals. That's staggeringly low - an average of less than one per class! (In fact, I suspect the private North London Collegiate takes more poor kids through its scholarship programmes.)
Everyone likes the idea of grammar schools. I like the idea of grammar schools. But the data and the evidence is clear: they do not promote social mobility,
Aptitude testing is the key, really hard aptitude tests that can't be studied for. A proper IQ test. The middle classes can squirm all they like but it is the only way to level the playing field.
My sister went to Henrietta Barnett btw!
It's an outstanding school; certainly one of the three best girls schools in the country.
Why do posh people have such a dim view of grammar schools?
Maybe it's because they subconsciously (or otherwise) realise they might represent a threat to their own position and that of their children. Clever children from ordinary backgrounds treading on their territory.
Except that what happens in most grammar school areas is that middle class parents celebrate their luck in not having to pay school fees, while kids of poorer families (who can't afford to have their kids tutored) lose out.
I live close to the excellent Henrietta Barnett school, and I hope my daughter gets in on the 11-plus to get there. In fact, I suspect all the girls from my daughter's incredibly expensive prep school will be applying there.
But just 23 kids in the whole of Henrietta Barnett get free school meals. That's staggeringly low - an average of less than one per class! (In fact, I suspect the private North London Collegiate takes more poor kids through its scholarship programmes.)
Everyone likes the idea of grammar schools. I like the idea of grammar schools. But the data and the evidence is clear: they do not promote social mobility,
Now they may well not but they certainly did in my day. I went to a grammar school in Battersea and most of the boys were from the council estates in Wandsworth, Clapham, Putney and Streatham. Most of the sixth form went on to university and a few each year made it to Oxbridge and that was in the days when university education took about 10% of school leavers.
Why the situation has changed to the one we seem to have now I am not sure. I think that the two biggest drivers are that the upper-middle classes (doctors and solicitors and so forth) have been priced out of public schools (and so their children are now competing) and that there are so few grammar schools that the competition favours those who can pay for an edge.
My own belief is that grammar schools now belong in the past in the same way as conscription, capital punishment and steam railways. That is not to say I think selective education is a bad idea in itself, quite the opposite, but there are better ways of doing it.
Why do posh people have such a dim view of grammar schools?
Maybe it's because they subconsciously (or otherwise) realise they might represent a threat to their own position and that of their children. Clever children from ordinary backgrounds treading on their territory.
Except that what happens in most grammar school areas is that middle class parents celebrate their luck in not having to pay school fees, while kids of poorer families (who can't afford to have their kids tutored) lose out.
I live close to the excellent Henrietta Barnett school, and I hope my daughter gets in on the 11-plus to get there. In fact, I suspect all the girls from my daughter's incredibly expensive prep school will be applying there.
But just 23 kids in the whole of Henrietta Barnett get free school meals. That's staggeringly low - an average of less than one per class! (In fact, I suspect the private North London Collegiate takes more poor kids through its scholarship programmes.)
Everyone likes the idea of grammar schools. I like the idea of grammar schools. But the data and the evidence is clear: they do not promote social mobility,
Aptitude testing is the key, really hard aptitude tests that can't be studied for. A proper IQ test. The middle classes can squirm all they like but it is the only way to level the playing field.
My sister went to Henrietta Barnett btw!
It's an outstanding school; certainly one of the three best girls schools in the country.
Yes, St Paul's is v good as well, my first girlfriend went there. She is now a surgeon of some sort.
It is not uncommon amongst heterosexual couples to live in tri-relationships. People make choices. Deal with it.
Just think of how much disposable income the "couple" has!
To be honest, a tri-gay couple will likely have a lot less than Mick Philpott thanks to New Labours incentivisation of "all the kids your concubines can bear".
It is not uncommon amongst heterosexual couples to live in tri-relationships. People make choices. Deal with it.
Just think of how much disposable income the "couple" has!
To be honest, a tri-gay couple will likely have a lot less than Mick Philpott thanks to New Labours incentivisation of "all the kids your concubines can bear".
Why do posh people have such a dim view of grammar schools?
Maybe it's because they subconsciously (or otherwise) realise they might represent a threat to their own position and that of their children. Clever children from ordinary backgrounds treading on their territory.
Except that what happens in most grammar school areas is that middle class parents celebrate their luck in not having to pay school fees, while kids of poorer families (who can't afford to have their kids tutored) lose out.
I live close to the excellent Henrietta Barnett school, and I hope my daughter gets in on the 11-plus to get there. In fact, I suspect all the girls from my daughter's incredibly expensive prep school will be applying there.
But just 23 kids in the whole of Henrietta Barnett get free school meals. That's staggeringly low - an average of less than one per class! (In fact, I suspect the private North London Collegiate takes more poor kids through its scholarship programmes.)
Everyone likes the idea of grammar schools. I like the idea of grammar schools. But the data and the evidence is clear: they do not promote social mobility,
Aptitude testing is the key, really hard aptitude tests that can't be studied for. A proper IQ test. The middle classes can squirm all they like but it is the only way to level the playing field.
My sister went to Henrietta Barnett btw!
It's an outstanding school; certainly one of the three best girls schools in the country.
Yes, St Paul's is v good as well, my first girlfriend went there. She is now a surgeon of some sort.
And the last of the troika is North London Collegiate... (Or so I'm told.)
... Now they may well not but they certainly did in my day. ...
And that's certainly true. But it's not what happens today, the areas with grammar school attract a hous price bubble (which obviously the tories are happy with) and money goes to money.
Ironically, the US system probably offers a much better model with Magnet schools, it allows higher attainment based on more than educational competence, so you can have music and sports and (at a much higher level) educational schools which work over a wide area.
If public schools are to differentiate, they should REALLY differentiate.
Howgate by election result (Cumbria County Council)
Labour 436 Conservative 304 UKIP 176 Two spoilt papers Turnout 20.3% 8% Swing from Labour to Conservative compared with 2013
Incidentally I mentioned to Gillian Troughton that a "friend of a friend" had described her on this site as a bit Corbyny. She laughed - and not in a way that suggested she agreed with the description.
Quite right. The correct terminology is Corbynista.
Not with Nanos today where it has widened with the Liberals on 37% to the Tories 29%, EKOS had the Liberals on 34% yesterday, 33.5% today, so not much change other than the Tories up to 32%
Why do posh people have such a dim view of grammar schools?
Maybe it's because they subconsciously (or otherwise) realise they might represent a threat to their own position and that of their children. Clever children from ordinary backgrounds treading on their territory.
Except that what happens in most grammar school areas is that middle class parents celebrate their luck in not having to pay school fees, while kids of poorer families (who can't afford to have their kids tutored) lose out.
I live close to the excellent Henrietta Barnett school, and I hope my daughter gets in on the 11-plus to get there. In fact, I suspect all the girls from my daughter's incredibly expensive prep school will be applying there.
But just 23 kids in the whole of Henrietta Barnett get free school meals. That's staggeringly low - an average of less than one per class! (In fact, I suspect the private North London Collegiate takes more poor kids through its scholarship programmes.)
Everyone likes the idea of grammar schools. I like the idea of grammar schools. But the data and the evidence is clear: they do not promote social mobility,
Aptitude testing is the key, really hard aptitude tests that can't be studied for. A proper IQ test. The middle classes can squirm all they like but it is the only way to level the playing field.
My sister went to Henrietta Barnett btw!
It's an outstanding school; certainly one of the three best girls schools in the country.
Yes, St Paul's is v good as well, my first girlfriend went there. She is now a surgeon of some sort.
And the last of the troika is North London Collegiate... (Or so I'm told.)
Yes, though I would rate HB and St Paul's above it, I think the latter is best of the three and gives a better all around education as well as a sold academic foundation.
What I never understood was why QE was a selective school (which I went to) but the girl's school was comprehensive (and not very good) while St Michael's (another school you may want to look at for your daughter) is a grammar school.
Why do posh people have such a dim view of grammar schools?
Maybe it's because they subconsciously (or otherwise) realise they might represent a threat to their own position and that of their children. Clever children from ordinary backgrounds treading on their territory.
Except that what happens in most grammar school areas is that middle class parents celebrate their luck in not having to pay school fees, while kids of poorer families (who can't afford to have their kids tutored) lose out.
I live close to the excellent Henrietta Barnett school, and I hope my daughter gets in on the 11-plus to get there. In fact, I suspect all the girls from my daughter's incredibly expensive prep school will be applying there.
But just 23 kids in the whole of Henrietta Barnett get free school meals. That's staggeringly low - an average of less than one per class! (In fact, I suspect the private North London Collegiate takes more poor kids through its scholarship programmes.)
Everyone likes the idea of grammar schools. I like the idea of grammar schools. But the data and the evidence is clear: they do not promote social mobility,
Now they may well not but they certainly did in my day. I went to a grammar school in Battersea and most of the boys were from the council estates in Wandsworth, Clapham, Putney and Streatham. Most of the sixth form went on to university and a few each year made it to Oxbridge and that was in the days when university education took about 10% of school leavers.
Why the situation has changed to the one we seem to have now I am not sure. I think that the two biggest drivers are that the upper-middle classes (doctors and solicitors and so forth) have been priced out of public schools (and so their children are now competing) and that there are so few grammar schools that the competition favours those who can pay for an edge.
My own belief is that grammar schools now belong in the past in the same way as conscription, capital punishment and steam railways. That is not to say I think selective education is a bad idea in itself, quite the opposite, but there are better ways of doing it.
I think there'd be something to be said for non-selective but academically-oriented schools, at least in urban areas where it's reasonable to put something resembling a choice on offer for parents. (Out in the sticks, you really need schools that would suit all-comers.)
Interesting one for me tonight, I know Gill Troughton in Cumbria via friends. She is quite a Corbynite.
I'm sure she is, with her seat and Jamie Reed's seat disappearing in boundary review, with what results they'll be fighting over. Jamie Reed had a twitter feed about as bad as Liz's Kendall... Being a Corbynite in such a scenario is a smart move.
I think you may be getting Gillian Troughton, the Labour candidate in the county council by-election today, mixed up with Sue Hayman, the former councillor for the division who was elected MP for Workington in May and whose consequent resignation from the County Council caused the by-election. Sue Hayman accepted a position as a whip under Corbyn, very possibly on the logic described above. As I mentioned in a previous post, I asked Gillian at the count if she agreed with the description of herself as a Corbynite and she laughed in a manner which I took as a "no."
I missed Sue getting the Workington gig. She was the candidate down my way n 2005 and narrowly lost to Stephen Crabb, after being selected late. Very able, very attractive too!
Liberals winning most votes and Conservatives most seats must be a strong possibility in Canada according to the figures on the 308 website.
308 site tonight's link to CBC seat tracker has the Liberals leading with 140 seats to 110 for the Tories and 86 for the NDP, so NDP actually slightly closer to the Tories than the Tories to the Liberals http://www.cbc.ca/news2/interactives/poll-tracker/2015/index.html
Why do posh people have such a dim view of grammar schools?
Maybe it's because they subconsciously (or otherwise) realise they might represent a threat to their own position and that of their children. Clever children from ordinary backgrounds treading on their territory.
Except that what happens in most grammar school areas is that middle class parents celebrate their luck in not having to pay school fees, while kids of poorer families (who can't afford to have their kids tutored) lose out.
I live close to the excellent Henrietta Barnett school, and I hope my daughter gets in on the 11-plus to get there. In fact, I suspect all the girls from my daughter's incredibly expensive prep school will be applying there.
But just 23 kids in the whole of Henrietta Barnett get free school meals. That's staggeringly low - an average of less than one per class! (In fact, I suspect the private North London Collegiate takes more poor kids through its scholarship programmes.)
Everyone likes the idea of grammar schools. I like the idea of grammar schools. But the data and the evidence is clear: they do not promote social mobility,
That's 23 upwardly mobile kids, better than none.
As Sam says further down if there was a grammar school in every town then the tutoring would be less of an issue.
Afraid I disagree entirely with you here Robert, the sure fire way to kickstart social mobility is to bring back grammar schools.
"Labour has been accused of bullying its own MPs after the party named and shamed rebels who refused to oppose the government’s austerity measures.
Email inboxes of the 21 MPs who did not fall into line with John McDonnell, the shadow chancellor, were deluged with complaints and abuse from hard-left activists yesterday.
Supporters of Jeremy Corbyn, the party leader who has promised a “kinder politics”, accused the MPs of being disgraceful and “on a par with the Tories”. They demanded immediate resignations from those who refused on Wednesday to vote against government plans to run a budget surplus in normal times."
Carson - $20.8 million. His multi-week book tour limits his campaigning Trump - self-funding and has spent almost nothing. Bush - $13.4 million Cruz - $12.2 million Fiorina $6.8 million Rubio - $6 milllion Kasich - $4.3 million Christie - $4.2 million Paul - $2.5 million
"Labour has been accused of bullying its own MPs after the party named and shamed rebels who refused to oppose the government’s austerity measures.
Email inboxes of the 21 MPs who did not fall into line with John McDonnell, the shadow chancellor, were deluged with complaints and abuse from hard-left activists yesterday.
Supporters of Jeremy Corbyn, the party leader who has promised a “kinder politics”, accused the MPs of being disgraceful and “on a par with the Tories”. They demanded immediate resignations from those who refused on Wednesday to vote against government plans to run a budget surplus in normal times."
Why do posh people have such a dim view of grammar schools?
Maybe it's because they subconsciously (or otherwise) realise they might represent a threat to their own position and that of their children. Clever children from ordinary backgrounds treading on their territory.
Except that what happens in most grammar school areas is that middle class parents celebrate their luck in not having to pay school fees, while kids of poorer families (who can't afford to have their kids tutored) lose out.
I live close to the excellent Henrietta Barnett school, and I hope my daughter gets in on the 11-plus to get there. In fact, I suspect all the girls from my daughter's incredibly expensive prep school will be applying there.
But just 23 kids in the whole of Henrietta Barnett get free school meals. That's staggeringly low - an average of less than one per class! (In fact, I suspect the private North London Collegiate takes more poor kids through its scholarship programmes.)
Everyone likes the idea of grammar schools. I like the idea of grammar schools. But the data and the evidence is clear: they do not promote social mobility,
That's 23 upwardly mobile kids, better than none.
As Sam says further down if there was a grammar school in every town then the tutoring would be less of an issue.
Afraid I disagree entirely with you here Robert, the sure fire way to kickstart social mobility is to bring back grammar schools.
People from my sort of background needed Grammar schools to compete with children from privileged homes like Shirley Williams and Anthony Wedgwood Benn. - M. H. Thatcher (14 October, 1977)
Some worrying numbers in there for both SCON & SLAB - not insignificant scepticism among their voters:
Trust to tell truth - net (among VI) SLAB: +48 SCON: +46 SNP: +73
Also some difference of opinion between SNP & other voters
Total Base (SNP) Net support: Increase income tax to improve public services: +15 (+40) Increase income tax to increase benefits: -27 (-5)
Yet still the trust in the SNP and backing for the SNP is not translating into a mandate for independence and also some scepticism of increased tax going on more welfare. Night
Interestingly the main animus appears to be between SNP voters and other parties - which the Tories reciprocate - but Labour do not. The Scottish Tories have the lowest opinion of the SNP by a substantial margin, while neither SLAB nor SCON voters think the other party is disreputable. SNP voters are most confident of their own party's rectitude.
Some worrying numbers in there for both SCON & SLAB - not insignificant scepticism among their voters:
Trust to tell truth - net (among VI) SLAB: +48 SCON: +46 SNP: +73
Also some difference of opinion between SNP & other voters
Total Base (SNP) Net support: Increase income tax to improve public services: +15 (+40) Increase income tax to increase benefits: -27 (-5)
Yet still the trust in the SNP and backing for the SNP is not translating into a mandate for independence and also some scepticism of increased tax going on more welfare. Night
No, which is the trap some nationalists fall into repeatedly - the SNP is not Scotland and there is more to the SNP than independence (as Sturgeon is fully aware). The SNP seek to present themselves as 'the competent party of government' - and given the alternative, was a reasonable proposition. How long that record can run, given the mounting failures and muck ups that overcome any party of government only time will tell......but both SLAB and SCON need to do more to persuade their own supporters - let alone anyone else's - that they are the alternative 'competent party of government'.
Some worrying numbers in there for both SCON & SLAB - not insignificant scepticism among their voters:
Trust to tell truth - net (among VI) SLAB: +48 SCON: +46 SNP: +73
Also some difference of opinion between SNP & other voters
Total Base (SNP) Net support: Increase income tax to improve public services: +15 (+40) Increase income tax to increase benefits: -27 (-5)
Yet still the trust in the SNP and backing for the SNP is not translating into a mandate for independence and also some scepticism of increased tax going on more welfare. Night
No, which is the trap some nationalists fall into repeatedly - the SNP is not Scotland and there is more to the SNP than independence (as Sturgeon is fully aware). The SNP seek to present themselves as 'the competent party of government' - and given the alternative, was a reasonable proposition. How long that record can run, given the mounting failures and muck ups that overcome any party of government only time will tell......but both SLAB and SCON need to do more to persuade their own supporters - let alone anyone else's - that they are the alternative 'competent party of government'.
The nationalists will dominate the next decade or two going on the Quebec example but that does not mean independence is inevitable either agreed, night
Howgate by election result (Cumbria County Council)
Labour 436 Conservative 304 UKIP 176 Two spoilt papers Turnout 20.3% 8% Swing from Labour to Conservative compared with 2013
Incidentally I mentioned to Gillian Troughton that a "friend of a friend" had described her on this site as a bit Corbyny. She laughed - and not in a way that suggested she agreed with the description.
Congratulations Gill! She will be an excellent councillor.
I suppose it all depends what you mean by Corbynite. Gill is certainly of the left, and her tweets from the party conference are all pretty enthusiastic for Jezza. She differs in some ways though - notably she is an active Christian, amongst other things.
Judging by the bizarre U turns in LP policy, I am not sure if even Corbyn himself could be called a Corbynite anymore!
Just watching last night's This Week. The downright hypocrisy of Beatrix Campbell and, I'm sad to say Alan Johnson, was staggering. It's as though Rotherham never happened.
Pretty pisspoor. 3 fruitcakes and two librarians. With Helmer's 'tache we have real potential for low budget viewing.
Doc, not for the first time you have posted a moustacheist comment. I can keep silent on such rampant bigotry no longer. I protest. Posts like your last one have no place in polite society and to read one coming from a man in your position is deeply disturbing.
My apologies. Though there is a strong tendency for autocrats to favour a tache, I am perhaps expressing my own inadequacy in this area. I grew a tache for Movember one year and it was pointed out that it gave me the looks not of Magnum PI but rather his annoying English butler. It was shaved off by popular demand in the fox household.
"Labour has been accused of bullying its own MPs after the party named and shamed rebels who refused to oppose the government’s austerity measures.
Email inboxes of the 21 MPs who did not fall into line with John McDonnell, the shadow chancellor, were deluged with complaints and abuse from hard-left activists yesterday.
Supporters of Jeremy Corbyn, the party leader who has promised a “kinder politics”, accused the MPs of being disgraceful and “on a par with the Tories”. They demanded immediate resignations from those who refused on Wednesday to vote against government plans to run a budget surplus in normal times."
The nasty party?
They always were. Who could forget Bevan's infamous remark that he considered Tories 'lower than vermin' - a remark Foot unconvincingly tried to explain away as taken out of context in his biography of Foot? Or Shinwell's call for armed insurrection? Never mind all the things we saw in Manchester?
The problem with Labour's sense of themselves as virtuous is that it gives them a licence to treat their opponents as evil. This is despite the fact that, Tebbitt's characterisation aside, the Conservatives have actually been one of the more moderate and responsible democratic parties in Europe over the last hundred years, who have done a great many impressive social reforms on their own account (everyone forgets the NHS and the national education system were first developed under the Churchill coalition by Conservative ministers - Wilink and Butler - on the advice of Beveridge, a Liberal, although Labour later downplayed their role in a bid to take more credit themselves).
And that leads them to look like a bunch of idiots. On last week's Have I Got News For You, I turned off the instant Diane Abbott - the rudest and most dishonest politician in politics - started talking about a 'kinder, gentler politics', because actually that was beyond satire.
"Labour has been accused of bullying its own MPs after the party named and shamed rebels who refused to oppose the government’s austerity measures.
Email inboxes of the 21 MPs who did not fall into line with John McDonnell, the shadow chancellor, were deluged with complaints and abuse from hard-left activists yesterday.
Supporters of Jeremy Corbyn, the party leader who has promised a “kinder politics”, accused the MPs of being disgraceful and “on a par with the Tories”. They demanded immediate resignations from those who refused on Wednesday to vote against government plans to run a budget surplus in normal times."
I have to admit, sadly, that I did not send a single email. Terrible of me ! There are , at least, 21 Labour MPs who support Tory financial policies.
Comments
Rod Liddle nailed it on the migrant crisis.
Why the situation has changed to the one we seem to have now I am not sure. I think that the two biggest drivers are that the upper-middle classes (doctors and solicitors and so forth) have been priced out of public schools (and so their children are now competing) and that there are so few grammar schools that the competition favours those who can pay for an edge.
My own belief is that grammar schools now belong in the past in the same way as conscription, capital punishment and steam railways. That is not to say I think selective education is a bad idea in itself, quite the opposite, but there are better ways of doing it.
LAB - 47.6% (-12.9)
CON - 33.2% (+2.2)
UKIP - 19.2% (+19.2)
UKIP HOLD Chatteris (Cambridgeshire).
Thats a change. Waiting for figures.
Chatteris (Cambridgeshire) result:
UKIP - 41.0% (+6.2)
CON - 40.3% (+5.8)
LDEM - 18.7% (-2.6)
Got 'em.
Ironically, the US system probably offers a much better model with Magnet schools, it allows higher attainment based on more than educational competence, so you can have music and sports and (at a much higher level) educational schools which work over a wide area.
If public schools are to differentiate, they should REALLY differentiate.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_in_the_Canadian_federal_election,_2015
What I never understood was why QE was a selective school (which I went to) but the girl's school was comprehensive (and not very good) while St Michael's (another school you may want to look at for your daughter) is a grammar school.
The lack of a Labour candidate was surely the key here, mind.
https://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.net/cumulus_uploads/document/mr8k4ikbr3/TimesResults_October15_ScotlandVI,tax,parties_w.pdf
Incidentally there's some interesting international comparisons on wikipedia's entry for "Gymnasium".
Very able, very attractive too!
http://www.cbc.ca/news2/interactives/poll-tracker/2015/index.html
As Sam says further down if there was a grammar school in every town then the tutoring would be less of an issue.
Afraid I disagree entirely with you here Robert, the sure fire way to kickstart social mobility is to bring back grammar schools.
"Labour has been accused of bullying its own MPs after the party named and shamed rebels who refused to oppose the government’s austerity measures.
Email inboxes of the 21 MPs who did not fall into line with John McDonnell, the shadow chancellor, were deluged with complaints and abuse from hard-left activists yesterday.
Supporters of Jeremy Corbyn, the party leader who has promised a “kinder politics”, accused the MPs of being disgraceful and “on a par with the Tories”. They demanded immediate resignations from those who refused on Wednesday to vote against government plans to run a budget surplus in normal times."
Carson - $20.8 million. His multi-week book tour limits his campaigning
Trump - self-funding and has spent almost nothing.
Bush - $13.4 million
Cruz - $12.2 million
Fiorina $6.8 million
Rubio - $6 milllion
Kasich - $4.3 million
Christie - $4.2 million
Paul - $2.5 million
- M. H. Thatcher (14 October, 1977)
"He accused Batmanghelidjh of using “non-stop spiel, psychobabble and a torrent” of words rather than answer questions."
http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2015/oct/15/kids-company-chiefs-deny-cash-willy-nilly-camila-batmanghelidjh
Trust to tell truth - net (among VI)
SLAB: +48
SCON: +46
SNP: +73
Also some difference of opinion between SNP & other voters
Total Base (SNP) Net support:
Increase income tax to improve public services: +15 (+40)
Increase income tax to increase benefits: -27 (-5)
Interestingly the main animus appears to be between SNP voters and other parties - which the Tories reciprocate - but Labour do not. The Scottish Tories have the lowest opinion of the SNP by a substantial margin, while neither SLAB nor SCON voters think the other party is disreputable. SNP voters are most confident of their own party's rectitude.
Sleazy & disreputable (net)
SLAB - among VI:
SCON: -17
SLAB: -69
SNP: +31
SCON:
SCON: -87
SLAB: -12
SNP: +33
SNP:
SCON: +47
SLAB: +12
SNP: -89
I suppose it all depends what you mean by Corbynite. Gill is certainly of the left, and her tweets from the party conference are all pretty enthusiastic for Jezza. She differs in some ways though - notably she is an active Christian, amongst other things.
Judging by the bizarre U turns in LP policy, I am not sure if even Corbyn himself could be called a Corbynite anymore!
The problem with Labour's sense of themselves as virtuous is that it gives them a licence to treat their opponents as evil. This is despite the fact that, Tebbitt's characterisation aside, the Conservatives have actually been one of the more moderate and responsible democratic parties in Europe over the last hundred years, who have done a great many impressive social reforms on their own account (everyone forgets the NHS and the national education system were first developed under the Churchill coalition by Conservative ministers - Wilink and Butler - on the advice of Beveridge, a Liberal, although Labour later downplayed their role in a bid to take more credit themselves).
And that leads them to look like a bunch of idiots. On last week's Have I Got News For You, I turned off the instant Diane Abbott - the rudest and most dishonest politician in politics - started talking about a 'kinder, gentler politics', because actually that was beyond satire.