I'm curious - does anyone who actually travels by train think that rail nationalisation is a bad idea?
If so, do they use Southern????
Do you know how few people in the country travel regularly by train? the great majority of those who do are in SE England - an area where Labour may not make very many gains.
All that may be true, but I wasn't really suggesting it's going to be a massively popular policy that will win Labour the election. More that those who suffer the realities of rail travel may not find it as ridiculous as the tabloid press are going to make out.
The utterly embarrassing, feckless, pathetic national disgrace that is Southern railways is the perfect case study. I'd venture that 60-80% of its users want it brought back under public control as a concession of TfL. The government says no. Note: I am just about to board a Southern train. Last time I made this journey, the service literally disappeared, with no warning. Twice that has happened to me in as many months.
I'm curious - does anyone who actually travels by train think that rail nationalisation is a bad idea?
If so, do they use Southern????
I do. The problem with nationalised industries has always been that you can't embarrass them by threatening the well being of their business. The result is you get involved in a Kafkaesque Labyrinth for which there is no recourse. British Rail for all the romantic memories was about the worst.
Surely Corbyn's camp leaked the manifesto themselves to ensure that the shadow cabinet couldn't tinker/water it down... seems that's what happened to me.
This Labour manifesto. Bloody hell. Is it real? If it is the polls will move over the next few days. Makes the longest suicide note look positively sensible. Telegraph absolutely monstering it today.
Who reads the fucking Telegraph ?
I do.. The paper edition twice a week and online for free..
I also read the Grauniad, The D Mail, Th Mirros and the Sub.. the latter take 2 minutes each each. All on line.
The Telegraph has lots of faults. So do the rest.
I suspect you're a typical Left winger who cannot stand reading opinions that conflict with your beliefs... :-)
Surely Corbyn's camp leaked the manifesto themselves to ensure that the shadow cabinet couldn't tinker/water it down... seems that's what happened to me.
It may not be tinkered with all that much I think that's right, but they will see what people liked and so what to emphasise.
Surely Corbyn's camp leaked the manifesto themselves to ensure that the shadow cabinet couldn't tinker/water it down... seems that's what happened to me.
Guaranteed that's what happened. He's trying to tie them all to his leadership to make a coup harder. He's not resigning regardless.
I just don't believe it. No way are Labour on 30%. Either I am, and many PBers, are completely reading the runes wrong, or there is going to need to be another polling inquiry if this keeps up.
It's a PB doctrine that disagreeing with every poll is a sign that one's deluding oneself. It's what led people into bvetting on Le Pen long after it was blindingly obvious that she'd lose. Yes, the polls were slightly wrong over Brexit (a few %), but actually right about Clinton (she won most votes, but in the wrong places).
Moreover, those of us on the ground (apologies if you are in fact actively campaigning for anyone) are mostly confirming the impression - Labour is maintaining all but a fraction of its 2015 vote (which was already down to the "always Labour" plus middle-class Guardianistas) and picking up some people from across the spectrum who like Corbyn's unassuming style and dislike the Empress May stuff. We're losing a trickle (e.g. Southam) who feel strongly about Hamas and the IRA but most people struggle to distinguish Hamas from humus and feel life has moved on from the IRA. And overall the polarisation of the election is giving Labour a boost.
Equally I believe the polls showing the Tories well ahead. It's obvious on the doorstep that ex-UKIP voters are switching to them, and that's the main story of the election. Roughly 45-30 is where we're at.
To translate, Corbyn is failing to do all the things that he said his leadership would deliver: a comeback in Scotland, more engagement from the young, more votes from previous non-voters; while proving incapable of persuading any Tories or previous UKIP voters that they should vote for the party. In other words, there is no way a Corbyn-led Labour party can ever defeat the Tories.
This is the problem, basically: the entire Labour leadership team and a lot of the membership don't need a Labour government and do not fear the consequences of a Tory one. Comfortably off and sheltered from reality they are playing a wonderful game. It is unforgiveable, quite frankly.
This is shaping up to be a perfect election for the Tories: a tidy majority with a mandate to deliver whatever Brexit finally gets negotiated; the sole party of Unionism in Scotland; the LibDems still floundering with a handful of seats; UKIP sent to the retirement home; and Labour still chugging along with Corbyn at the helm for years to come.
I just don't believe it. No way are Labour on 30%. Either I am, and many PBers, are completely reading the runes wrong, or there is going to need to be another polling inquiry if this keeps up.
It's a PB doctrine that disagreeing with every poll is a sign that one's deluding oneself. It's what led people into bvetting on Le Pen long after it was blindingly obvious that she'd lose. Yes, the polls were slightly wrong over Brexit (a few %), but actually right about Clinton (she won most votes, but in the wrong places).
Moreover, those of us on the ground (apologies if you are in fact actively campaigning for anyone) are mostly confirming the impression - Labour is maintaining all but a fraction of its 2015 vote (which was already down to the "always Labour" plus middle-class Guardianistas) and picking up some people from across the spectrum who like Corbyn's unassuming style and dislike the Empress May stuff. We're losing a trickle (e.g. Southam) who feel strongly about Hamas and the IRA but most people struggle to distinguish Hamas from humus and feel life has moved on from the IRA. And overall the polarisation of the election is giving Labour a boost.
Equally I believe the polls showing the Tories well ahead. It's obvious on the doorstep that ex-UKIP voters are switching to them, and that's the main story of the election. Roughly 45-30 is where we're at.
To translate, Corbyn is failing to do all the things that he said his leadership would deliver: a comeback in Scotland, more engagement from the young, more votes from previous non-voters; while proving incapable of persuading any Tories or previous UKIP voters that they should vote for the party. In other words, there is no way a Corbyn-led Labour party can ever defeat the Tories.
This is the problem, basically: the entire Labour leadership team and a lot of the membership don't need a Labour government and do not fear the consequences of a Tory one. Comfortably off and sheltered from reality they are playing a wonderful game. It is unforgiveable, quite frankly.
There is not a chance in hell that a Corbyn Labour Party is going to hold the labour vote steady. Nick's campaigning experience in 2015 suggested a Labour victory and we all remember how that one went. The Labour vote will be around 25%, so do your sums about how big May's majority will be.
Hmm. You seem to be implying renationalisation must be bad because it's Corbyn's policy, and Corbyn has other policies on trade unions that you think are bad.
That would be OK as an anti-Corbyn argument, but it was just renationalisation per se I was asking about.
But you aren't going to get nationalisation on its own, you will get everything else Corbyn plans as well. Giving a lot more power to intransigent trade unions doesn't sound like a good way of making the railways run better to me.
None of this is going to happen anyway, because Theresa May is going to be reelected (almost certainly!).
I was just trying to ask a question about people's views of renationalisation of the railways.
Personally, I'd be in favour of renationalisation if it were paired with massive infrastructure spending and a drastic increase of the network back to pre Beeching levels, but that will never happen, the car is King and it will ever be so mores the shame as a non driver.
Why would you want to go back to having branch lines with no patronage? The people voted with their feet when they purchased their cars.
This Labour manifesto. Bloody hell. Is it real? If it is the polls will move over the next few days. Makes the longest suicide note look positively sensible. Telegraph absolutely monstering it today.
Who reads the fucking Telegraph ?
Rather more than read the Guardian or any other broadsheet.
I'm curious - does anyone who actually travels by train think that rail nationalisation is a bad idea?
If so, do they use Southern????
Do you know how few people in the country travel regularly by train? the great majority of those who do are in SE England - an area where Labour may not make very many gains.
All that may be true, but I wasn't really suggesting it's going to be a massively popular policy that will win Labour the election. More that those who suffer the realities of rail travel may not find it as ridiculous as the tabloid press are going to make out.
The utterly embarrassing, feckless, pathetic national disgrace that is Southern railways is the perfect case study. I'd venture that 60-80% of its users want it brought back under public control as a concession of TfL. The government says no. Note: I am just about to board a Southern train. Last time I made this journey, the service literally disappeared, with no warning. Twice that has happened to me in as many months.
Southern's problems are much more multi-dimensional than ownership or management. The very same unions Corbyn wants to empower are creating most of the mess, and the nationalised Network Rail are probably next.
In addition, there are issues with areas well outside London having their services decided upon by TfL which, as non-London voters, they have no control over.
But leaving that aside, your posts from last night amused me. For one thing, you talk about the concession for London Overground. If you like it so much, why not convert the franchises into concessions rather than just nationalise?
Surely Corbyn's camp leaked the manifesto themselves to ensure that the shadow cabinet couldn't tinker/water it down... seems that's what happened to me.
The shadow cabinet is stuffed full with the only members of the PLP who agree with Jeremy, except Jon Ashworth - who will probably stand down after the election.
Surely Corbyn's camp leaked the manifesto themselves to ensure that the shadow cabinet couldn't tinker/water it down... seems that's what happened to me.
Guaranteed that's what happened. He's trying to tie them all to his leadership to make a coup harder. He's not resigning regardless.
Why would they want to water it down? The only vaguely possible strategy for moderates is that Corbyn and Co are seen to own this election defeat lock, stock and barrel. This then persuades enough Caitlin Morans to change their minds about the cult and elect Yvette.
If anything, a right wing Lab MP should be pushing for more ludicrous stuff in the manifesto.
I'm curious - does anyone who actually travels by train think that rail nationalisation is a bad idea?
If so, do they use Southern????
I do. The problem with nationalised industries has always been that you can't embarrass them by threatening the well being of their business. The result is you get involved in a Kafkaesque Labyrinth for which there is no recourse. British Rail for all the romantic memories was about the worst.
Hmm. You seem to be implying renationalisation must be bad because it's Corbyn's policy, and Corbyn has other policies on trade unions that you think are bad.
That would be OK as an anti-Corbyn argument, but it was just renationalisation per se I was asking about.
But you aren't going to get nationalisation on its own, you will get everything else Corbyn plans as well. Giving a lot more power to intransigent trade unions doesn't sound like a good way of making the railways run better to me.
None of this is going to happen anyway, because Theresa May is going to be reelected (almost certainly!).
I was just trying to ask a question about people's views of renationalisation of the railways.
Personally, I'd be in favour of renationalisation if it were paired with massive infrastructure spending and a drastic increase of the network back to pre Beeching levels, but that will never happen, the car is King and it will ever be so mores the shame as a non driver.
Why would you want to go back to having branch lines with no patronage? The people voted with their feet when they purchased their cars.
Because I don't drive and it would make things immeasurably easier for me, especially if combined with a nationalised coach network covering what isn't on the rail system. It's an entirely selfish view, but politics generally is.
Where "a good chunk" means "one Twitter account that was never relevant", apparently!
The disgusting proles committed votecrime here last year, and votecrime by proxy together with aggravated thoughtcrime in the French elections, because they are disgusting proles.
I have never read a worse or more incoherent article by a paid professional journalist; you'd expect proper political commentary to shine by comparison with the online amateur competition, but instead here is this bloke writing: "Could Brexit be followed by, god help us, “Frexit”? For a certain type of Englishman there was something priapic about even thinking so." That is below-the-line, Guardian c.i.f. stuff. Ignore.
What Mrs May really needs is a few polls with the Tory lead down to single digits.
Or a good old Tory campaign coitus up.
Perhaps she can be recorded off mic calling voters thick, smelly, or bigots.
She already has a number of polls putting Labour on 31%, the same as last time. Confirms Nick Palmer's reports of the Labour vote holding steady.
I have to admit to being totally surprised that Labour is hitting circa 30% all the time now. They could 32-33 by the end of the campaign.
Actually, apart from Abbott's plane crash, things have gone relatively smoothly.
It does seem to be an amazing performance in the polls by Labour, despite the widespread ridiculing of its leader and increasingly so of his second in command, John McDonnell.
It does now appear entirely possible that Labour could end winning a larger share of the vote than they achieved in the 2015 GE. Were this to be the case, the party's hierarchy would no doubt claim that it was not so much Corbyn and his team who lost the GE for Labour, but rather UKIP and possibly the SNP to a lesser extent who had handed it on a plate to the Tories. We live in strange times.
A lot of people seem to have assumed Labour must do much worse than 2015 because Corbyn is much worse than Milliband and thus find 30% poll shares hard to believe.
But also a lot of people praised the Con 2015 message of vote Ed get Nicola. I think it was a big factor in delivering the Con majority. So the underlying Labour percentage may have been 33% say rather than the 31% they got. If that's true then it's possible for the Corbyn factor to have lost Labour 10% of its support and still have them polling at 30%. So there is no anomoly to explain.
Labour share at 30-35% available at 5/1 at Corals if you're tempted. I am but not going in right now. I also don't see Labour dropping below 150 seats. It could happen but I don't think it's likely.
Fair comment PY, I think it's also fair to add that were UKIP's share of the GB vote to collapse as expected from 13% in 2015 to around 5% in June 2017, then whilst the Tories will undoubtedly be the main beneficiary of this 8% windfall, it's probably the case that Labour will pick up something of the order of 20% of this vote shift from the Purple Team, i.e. +/- 1.6%.
Surely Corbyn's camp leaked the manifesto themselves to ensure that the shadow cabinet couldn't tinker/water it down... seems that's what happened to me.
Guaranteed that's what happened. He's trying to tie them all to his leadership to make a coup harder. He's not resigning regardless.
Why would they want to water it down? The only vaguely possible strategy for moderates is that Corbyn and Co are seen to own this election defeat lock, stock and barrel. This then persuades enough Caitlin Morans to change their minds about the cult and elect Yvette.
If anything, a right wing Lab MP should be pushing for more ludicrous stuff in the manifesto.
Because they are going to have to campaign on it. They can distance themselves from the leader but not party policy. Unless they want to be totally wiped out. He's making Labour HIS labour and making it harder and harder to tack back centrewards.
I'm curious - does anyone who actually travels by train think that rail nationalisation is a bad idea?
If so, do they use Southern????
Do you know how few people in the country travel regularly by train? the great majority of those who do are in SE England - an area where Labour may not make very many gains.
All that may be true, but I wasn't really suggesting it's going to be a massively popular policy that will win Labour the election. More that those who suffer the realities of rail travel may not find it as ridiculous as the tabloid press are going to make out.
The utterly embarrassing, feckless, pathetic national disgrace that is Southern railways is the perfect case study. I'd venture that 60-80% of its users want it brought back under public control as a concession of TfL. The government says no. Note: I am just about to board a Southern train. Last time I made this journey, the service literally disappeared, with no warning. Twice that has happened to me in as many months.
Southern's problems are much more multi-dimensional than ownership or management. The very same unions Corbyn wants to empower are creating most of the mess, and the nationalised Network Rail are probably next.
In addition, there are issues with areas well outside London having their services decided upon by TfL which, as non-London voters, they have no control over.
But leaving that aside, your posts from last night amused me. For one thing, you talk about the concession for London Overground. If you like it so much, why not convert the franchises into concessions rather than just nationalise?
My main opposition is to franchising - which is a joke. No-one can give a good answer to the question: What is franchising for? I'm open to the concession model which, as you imply, works well for TfL. The public needs one visible and transparent arse to kick under one public brand. That all said, full nationalisation works well enough for some networks - Newcastle Metro, Tube. East Coast and Eurostar were run extremely well as nationalised railways until the Tories sold them off for nothing more than narrow ideology.
@PickardJE: Interesting rumour in @iainmartin1 column today that Philip Hammond could be replaced as chancellor by Amber Rudd after election.
The calibre of the current cabinet is already low to rock bottom; replacing Hammond with Rudd would make it even more mediocre.
Have to agree there. If there are to be changes I'd like to see some new, even younger blood. Hopefully at the least Esther McVee will be back in the cabinet.
'The utterly embarrassing, feckless, pathetic national disgrace that is Southern railways is the perfect case study. I'd venture that 60-80% of its users want it brought back under public control as a concession of TfL.'
Seems you have forgotten about the unions deliberately trying to trash the service.
Hmm. You seem to be implying renationalisation must be bad because it's Corbyn's policy, and Corbyn has other policies on trade unions that you think are bad.
That would be OK as an anti-Corbyn argument, but it was just renationalisation per se I was asking about.
But you aren't going to get nationalisation on its own, you will get everything else Corbyn plans as well. Giving a lot more power to intransigent trade unions doesn't sound like a good way of making the railways run better to me.
None of this is going to happen anyway, because Theresa May is going to be reelected (almost certainly!).
I was just trying to ask a question about people's views of renationalisation of the railways.
Personally, I'd be in favour of renationalisation if it were paired with massive infrastructure spending and a drastic increase of the network back to pre Beeching levels, but that will never happen, the car is King and it will ever be so mores the shame as a non driver.
Dyed...we are finally getting some sun in this corner of England.
Private cars will be a thing of the past within 30 years if not sooner.....once driverless vehicles are established
Wow,labour playing a blinder on policies,leaked today for big coverage today and again next week when labours manifesto is released.
Got to give credit to labour,outperforming the tories so far in the build up(keep some of the shadow cabinet hidden though ;-) )
yup - that must be why they're so far ahead in the polls... oh... wait a minute.
Nevertheless, apart from the their slogan not being as clear as the Tories, labour have had a decent start. Their polling has picked up when some thought it would drop further, Corbyn himself has not messed up, and they've got their policies out there.
Tories have also improved by about the same amount in the polls.
I'm not saying the Tories will not do well, but if the polling is right there will be no collapse that leads to an existential labour crisis. They were flirting with 25, now they regularly hit 31, and there's little reason to think more gaffes or bad stories will reduce them if the current ones haven't.
Cross over by 1st June is nailed on. #swingforward
Wow,labour playing a blinder on policies,leaked today for big coverage today and again next week when labours manifesto is released.
Got to give credit to labour,outperforming the tories so far in the build up(keep some of the shadow cabinet hidden though ;-) )
yup - that must be why they're so far ahead in the polls... oh... wait a minute.
Nevertheless, apart from the their slogan not being as clear as the Tories, labour have had a decent start. Their polling has picked up when some thought it would drop further, Corbyn himself has not messed up, and they've got their policies out there.
Tories have also improved by about the same amount in the polls.
I'm not saying the Tories will not do well, but if the polling is right there will be no collapse that leads to an existential labour crisis. They were flirting with 25, now they regularly hit 31, and there's little reason to think more gaffes or bad stories will reduce them if the current ones haven't.
Cross over by 1st June is nailed on. #swingforward
I'm curious - does anyone who actually travels by train think that rail nationalisation is a bad idea?
If so, do they use Southern????
I do. The problem with nationalised industries has always been that you can't embarrass them by threatening the well being of their business. The result is you get involved in a Kafkaesque Labyrinth for which there is no recourse. British Rail for all the romantic memories was about the worst.
Wow,labour playing a blinder on policies,leaked today for big coverage today and again next week when labours manifesto is released.
Got to give credit to labour,outperforming the tories so far in the build up(keep some of the shadow cabinet hidden though ;-) )
yup - that must be why they're so far ahead in the polls... oh... wait a minute.
Nevertheless, apart from the their slogan not being as clear as the Tories, labour have had a decent start. Their polling has picked up when some thought it would drop further, Corbyn himself has not messed up, and they've got their policies out there.
Tories have also improved by about the same amount in the polls.
I'm not saying the Tories will not do well, but if the polling is right there will be no collapse that leads to an existential labour crisis. They were flirting with 25, now they regularly hit 31, and there's little reason to think more gaffes or bad stories will reduce them if the current ones haven't.
I just don't believe it. No way are Labour on 30%. Either I am, and many PBers, are completely reading the runes wrong, or there is going to need to be another polling inquiry if this keeps up.
I struggle to believe it as well - we've seen losses in labour areas which do not stack up with them essentially doing no worse than 2015, we know the infighting that has been there, is the core vote plus those terrified of a big Tory majority really 31%? That's what we're being told. I'm sure many of us have money on the assumption the polls are wrong again, but what if they're not?
Are the losses because they're on 30 (if they are) or because the Tories are 16-18 points clear?
One under-reported feature of the polls post-2015 is that there has been little Lab-Con direct swing. That has changed in the last few months but it still amounts to only about 3% at best. If the Greens have lost a little to Corbyn (very possible given the policy / style overlap and, probably, the fewer number of Green candidates - though that's less likely to be picked up in the polls yet), have gained some former LD-Leave voters back, and have gained some former UKIP voters back, I could well beleved that they could still be at around 30.
But the absolute change on 2015 in the Labour vote isn't particularly relevant if Con has put on 10-12%.
If labour really are retaining practically all their 2015 vote, despite the constant infighting, then the labour brand is even stronger than thought, and truly impressive. I don't get such iron allegiance to a fluid, self contradicting entity like a political party, but tribalism is super strong.
As the rising Tory vote shows (and the Tory campaign plays to), a lot of people vote against parties under the FPTP system. There will be many people who do not like Corbyn, but who do not want to back May. Some of them will vote Labour, some (like me) will look elsewhere, a lot won't vote at all.
Hmm. You seem to be implying renationalisation must be bad because it's Corbyn's policy, and Corbyn has other policies on trade unions that you think are bad.
That would be OK as an anti-Corbyn argument, but it was just renationalisation per se I was asking about.
But you aren't going to get nationalisation on its own, you will get everything else Corbyn plans as well. Giving a lot more power to intransigent trade unions doesn't sound like a good way of making the railways run better to me.
None of this is going to happen anyway, because Theresa May is going to be reelected (almost certainly!).
I was just trying to ask a question about people's views of renationalisation of the railways.
Personally, I'd be in favour of renationalisation if it were paired with massive infrastructure spending and a drastic increase of the network back to pre Beeching levels, but that will never happen, the car is King and it will ever be so mores the shame as a non driver.
Dyed...we are finally getting some sun in this corner of England.
Private cars will be a thing of the past within 30 years if not sooner.....once driverless vehicles are established
Yes indeed, the Triangle is beautiful this morning. And I still havent seen a Tory poster in South Norwich You're right of course, I'm just miffed I'm not allowed to drive, and my partner not driving compounds it. Walking is overrated when it's further than the city!
Wow,labour playing a blinder on policies,leaked today for big coverage today and again next week when labours manifesto is released.
Got to give credit to labour,outperforming the tories so far in the build up(keep some of the shadow cabinet hidden though ;-) )
yup - that must be why they're so far ahead in the polls... oh... wait a minute.
Nevertheless, apart from the their slogan not being as clear as the Tories, labour have had a decent start. Their polling has picked up when some thought it would drop further, Corbyn himself has not messed up, and they've got their policies out there.
Tories have also improved by about the same amount in the polls.
I'm not saying the Tories will not do well, but if the polling is right there will be no collapse that leads to an existential labour crisis. They were flirting with 25, now they regularly hit 31, and there's little reason to think more gaffes or bad stories will reduce them if the current ones haven't.
I just don't believe it. No way are Labour on 30%. Either I am, and many PBers, are completely reading the runes wrong, or there is going to need to be another polling inquiry if this keeps up.
I struggle to believe it as well - we've seen losses in labour areas which do not stack up with them essentially doing no worse than 2015, we know the infighting that has been there, is the core vote plus those terrified of a big Tory majority really 31%? That's what we're being told. I'm sure many of us have money on the assumption the polls are wrong again, but what if they're not?
Are the losses because they're on 30 (if they are) or because the Tories are 16-18 points clear?
One under-reported feature of the polls post-2015 is that there has been little Lab-Con direct swing. That has changed in the last few months but it still amounts to only about 3% at best. If the Greens have lost a little to Corbyn (very possible given the policy / style overlap and, probably, the fewer number of Green candidates - though that's less likely to be picked up in the polls yet), have gained some former LD-Leave voters back, and have gained some former UKIP voters back, I could well beleved that they could still be at around 30.
But the absolute change on 2015 in the Labour vote isn't particularly relevant if Con has put on 10-12%.
It's relevant in term of predicting a big loss vs a cataclysmic loss.
Wow,labour playing a blinder on policies,leaked today for big coverage today and again next week when labours manifesto is released.
Got to give credit to labour,outperforming the tories so far in the build up(keep some of the shadow cabinet hidden though ;-) )
yup - that must be why they're so far ahead in the polls... oh... wait a minute.
Nevertheless, apart from the their slogan not being as clear as the Tories, labour have had a decent start. Their polling has picked up when some thought it would drop further, Corbyn himself has not messed up, and they've got their policies out there.
Tories have also improved by about the same amount in the polls.
I'm not saying the Tories will not do well, but if the polling is right there will be no collapse that leads to an existential labour crisis. They were flirting with 25, now they regularly hit 31, and there's little reason to think more gaffes or bad stories will reduce them if the current ones haven't.
I just don't believe it. No way are Labour on 30%. Either I am, and many PBers, are completely reading the runes wrong, or there is going to need to be another polling inquiry if this keeps up.
I struggle to believe it as well - we've seen losses in labour areas which do not stack up with them essentially doing no worse than 2015, we know the infighting that has been there, is the core vote plus those terrified of a big Tory majority really 31%? That's what we're being told. I'm sure many of us have money on the assumption the polls are wrong again, but what if they're not?
Are the losses because they're on 30 (if they are) or because the Tories are 16-18 points clear?
One under-reported feature of the polls post-2015 is that there has been little Lab-Con direct swing. That has changed in the last few months but it still amounts to only about 3% at best. If the Greens have lost a little to Corbyn (very possible given the policy / style overlap and, probably, the fewer number of Green candidates - though that's less likely to be picked up in the polls yet), have gained some former LD-Leave voters back, and have gained some former UKIP voters back, I could well beleved that they could still be at around 30.
But the absolute change on 2015 in the Labour vote isn't particularly relevant if Con has put on 10-12%.
Surely the point is that 'if' they are on 30% then it's still a pretty different 30% in different places than previously which might make a lot of difference in terms of seats.
This Labour manifesto. Bloody hell. Is it real? If it is the polls will move over the next few days. Makes the longest suicide note look positively sensible. Telegraph absolutely monstering it today.
Who reads the fucking Telegraph ?
Rather more than read the Guardian or any other broadsheet.
The Guardian and (ouch) the Mail have the largest online readership of any newspapers in the WORLD. Don't go by dead tree circulation.
This Labour manifesto. Bloody hell. Is it real? If it is the polls will move over the next few days. Makes the longest suicide note look positively sensible. Telegraph absolutely monstering it today.
Who reads the fucking Telegraph ?
I do.. The paper edition twice a week and online for free..
I also read the Grauniad, The D Mail, Th Mirros and the Sub.. the latter take 2 minutes each each. All on line.
The Telegraph has lots of faults. So do the rest.
I suspect you're a typical Left winger who cannot stand reading opinions that conflict with your beliefs... :-)
And on what basis do you suppose that a typical left winger can't stand reading opinions that conflict with their beliefs?
Fair comment PY, I think it's also fair to add that were UKIP's share of the GB vote to collapse as expected from 13% in 2015 to around 5% in June 2017, then whilst the Tories will undoubtedly be the main beneficiary of this 8% windfall, it's probably the case that Labour will pick up something of the order of 20% of this vote shift from the Purple Team, i.e. +/- 1.6%.
Let's not forget Sheffield, and ed's QT on 30th April 2015. In both cases there was a feeling, backed up by vox pops, that in the final days of the campaign voters took another look at the Labour contender and thought, actually, just no; I've been fooling myself, this guy is not a potential PM. It wouldn't be amazing if Lab held up well until the final fortnight and then plummeted.
yup - that must be why they're so far ahead in the polls... oh... wait a minute.
Nevertheless, apart from the their slogan not being as clear as the Tories, labour have had a decent start. Their polling has picked up when some thought it would drop further, Corbyn himself has not messed up, and they've got their policies out there.
Tories have also improved by about the same amount in the polls.
I'm not saying the Tories will not do well, but if the polling is right there will be no collapse that leads to an existential labour crisis. They were flirting with 25, now they regularly hit 31, and there's little reason to think more gaffes or bad stories will reduce them if the current ones haven't.
I just don't believe it. No way are Labour on 30%. Either I am, and many PBers, are completely reading the runes wrong, or there is going to need to be another polling inquiry if this keeps up.
I struggle to believe it as well - we've seen losses in labour areas which do not stack up with them essentially doing no worse than 2015, we know the infighting that has been there, is the core vote plus those terrified of a big Tory majority really 31%? That's what we're being told. I'm sure many of us have money on the assumption the polls are wrong again, but what if they're not?
Are the losses because they're on 30 (if they are) or because the Tories are 16-18 points clear?
One under-reported feature of the polls post-2015 is that there has been little Lab-Con direct swing. That has changed in the last few months but it still amounts to only about 3% at best. If the Greens have lost a little to Corbyn (very possible given the policy / style overlap and, probably, the fewer number of Green candidates - though that's less likely to be picked up in the polls yet), have gained some former LD-Leave voters back, and have gained some former UKIP voters back, I could well beleved that they could still be at around 30.
But the absolute change on 2015 in the Labour vote isn't particularly relevant if Con has put on 10-12%.
It's relevant in term of predicting a big loss vs a cataclysmic loss.
It really isn't. The size of the gap is the most important factor, followed by where the swing takes place, both geographically and socio-econimically. 30-48 will still be worse for Labour than 28-43.
What Mrs May really needs is a few polls with the Tory lead down to single digits.
Or a good old Tory campaign coitus up.
Perhaps she can be recorded off mic calling voters thick, smelly, or bigots.
She already has a number of polls putting Labour on 31%, the same as last time. Confirms Nick Palmer's reports of the Labour vote holding steady.
I have to admit to being totally surprised that Labour is hitting circa 30% all the time now. They could 32-33 by the end of the campaign.
Actually, apart from Abbott's plane crash, things have gone relatively smoothly.
It does seem to be an amazing performance in the polls by Labour, despite the widespread ridiculing of its leader and increasingly so of his second in command, John McDonnell.
It does now appear entirely possible that Labour could end winning a larger share of the vote than they achieved in the 2015 GE. Were this to be the case, the party's hierarchy would no doubt claim that it was not so much Corbyn and his team who lost the GE for Labour, but rather UKIP and possibly the SNP to a lesser extent who had handed it on a plate to the Tories. We live in strange times.
A lot of people seem to have assumed Labour must do much worse than 2015 because Corbyn is much worse than Milliband and thus find 30% poll shares hard to believe.
But also a lot of people praised the Con 2015 message of vote Ed get Nicola. I think it was a big factor in delivering the Con majority. So the underlying Labour percentage may have been 33% say rather than the 31% they got. If that's true then it's possible for the Corbyn factor to have lost Labour 10% of its support and still have them polling at 30%. So there is no anomoly to explain.
Labour share at 30-35% available at 5/1 at Corals if you're tempted. I am but not going in right now. I also don't see Labour dropping below 150 seats. It could happen but I don't think it's likely.
Fair comment PY, I think it's also fair to add that were UKIP's share of the GB vote to collapse as expected from 13% in 2015 to around 5% in June 2017, then whilst the Tories will undoubtedly be the main beneficiary of this 8% windfall, it's probably the case that Labour will pick up something of the order of 20% of this vote shift from the Purple Team, i.e. +/- 1.6%.
But...I think you'll find May is attracting a lot of Labour switchers much the same as Blair did in 97. That is why May is looking at a landslide of Blair proportions and that is why Labour will be lucky to poll much over 25%.
My main opposition is to franchising - which is a joke. No-one can give a good answer to the question: What is franchising for? I'm open to the concession model which, as you imply, works well for TfL. The public needs one visible and transparent arse to kick under one public brand. That all said, full nationalisation works well enough for some networks - Newcastle Metro, Tube. East Coast and Eurostar were run extremely well as nationalised railways until the Tories sold them off for nothing more than narrow ideology.
So what we need is to look into the best way of running services: and that may vary according to the particular setup. What works for Overground might not be the best model for (say) Northern Rail or South Western.
What we are getting from Labour is a dogmatic, ideological policy to renationalise, when it is far from clear that will help solve the problems. By all means look at it and alternative models; but it needs the problems defining and solutions found for the problems, rather than ideology.
If you think privatisation for ideological reasons was wrong, why is nationaisation for ideological reasons okay?
Along with EC and Eurostar, you might also want to mention the other privatised TOCs who are doing an excellent job at returning money to the taxpayer.
Hmm. You seem to be implying renationalisation must be bad because it's Corbyn's policy, and Corbyn has other policies on trade unions that you think are bad.
That would be OK as an anti-Corbyn argument, but it was just renationalisation per se I was asking about.
But you aren't going to get nationalisation on its own, you will get everything else Corbyn plans as well. Giving a lot more power to intransigent trade unions doesn't sound like a good way of making the railways run better to me.
None of this is going to happen anyway, because Theresa May is going to be reelected (almost certainly!).
I was just trying to ask a question about people's views of renationalisation of the railways.
If you are old enough to remember British Rail it is unlikely you'd ask the question. As a nationalised industry it evidently believed its purpose was to provide employment to its staff and passengers were an irritating inconvenience. If you didn't like it tough luck. For those who don't remember pre-privatisation industries (3 months for a phone line, anyone? Then wait in the whole day in the forlorn hope an engineer would actually show up) I can understand the superficial attraction - but look at the responses of people who have actual experience of them.
It wasn't either great or awful, but anyway everyone has mnoved on (I can cite examples of terrible customer service in the private sector back then, and they're not unknown now). The ultra-efficient Passort Office is a good example of a public service (with a new IT system that was delivered on time) that works well. By and large, you get the same people working in the system either way. Real competition does sometimes help but the franchise system doesn't provide that. And if you don't like a hypothetical state-managed Southern you can vote out the bastards responsible for it. How do you vote out a private quasi-monopoly?
'The utterly embarrassing, feckless, pathetic national disgrace that is Southern railways is the perfect case study. I'd venture that 60-80% of its users want it brought back under public control as a concession of TfL.'
Seems you have forgotten about the unions deliberately trying to trash the service.
Others seem to have forgotten that the Conservatives rushed through a botched salami sliced privatization in the death throws of the Major government.
Blair should have made it explicitly clear that his incoming government would have re-nationalized the railways without compensation. This would have killed Major's folly stone dead.
British Rail should have been privatized as one entity, with a substantial workers stake, and meaningful performance targets and staff bonuses and appropriate government subsidies where necessary.
This Labour manifesto. Bloody hell. Is it real? If it is the polls will move over the next few days. Makes the longest suicide note look positively sensible. Telegraph absolutely monstering it today.
Who reads the fucking Telegraph ?
Rather more than read the Guardian or any other broadsheet.
The Guardian and (ouch) the Mail have the largest online readership of any newspapers in the WORLD. Don't go by dead tree circulation.
That's true, although how much of the Mail's online readership is just checking in to celeb gossip? While that won't be quite as true for the Guardian, I'd still guess that the average time spent reading online is far less than those who buy a dead-tree copy.
This Labour manifesto. Bloody hell. Is it real? If it is the polls will move over the next few days. Makes the longest suicide note look positively sensible. Telegraph absolutely monstering it today.
Who reads the fucking Telegraph ?
I do.. The paper edition twice a week and online for free..
I also read the Grauniad, The D Mail, Th Mirros and the Sub.. the latter take 2 minutes each each. All on line.
The Telegraph has lots of faults. So do the rest.
I suspect you're a typical Left winger who cannot stand reading opinions that conflict with your beliefs... :-)
And on what basis do you suppose that a typical left winger can't stand reading opinions that conflict with their beliefs?
Because they are no different than typical right wingers, I'd guess.
If labour really are retaining practically all their 2015 vote, despite the constant infighting, then the labour brand is even stronger than thought, and truly impressive. I don't get such iron allegiance to a fluid, self contradicting entity like a political party, but tribalism is super strong.
As the rising Tory vote shows (and the Tory campaign plays to), a lot of people vote against parties under the FPTP system. There will be many people who do not like Corbyn, but who do not want to back May. Some of them will vote Labour, some (like me) will look elsewhere, a lot won't vote at all.
I still wait to see if the Labour vote really turns out. I'm thinking not so much, come the day.
'The utterly embarrassing, feckless, pathetic national disgrace that is Southern railways is the perfect case study. I'd venture that 60-80% of its users want it brought back under public control as a concession of TfL.'
Seems you have forgotten about the unions deliberately trying to trash the service.
Others seem to have forgotten that the Conservatives rushed through a botched salami sliced privatization in the death throws of the Major government.
Blair should have made it explicitly clear that his incoming government would have re-nationalized the railways without compensation. This would have killed Major's folly stone dead.
British Rail should have been privatized as one entity, with a substantial workers stake, and meaningful performance targets and staff bonuses and appropriate government subsidies where necessary.
Ironically it is the EU that is all for vertical separation.
yup - that must be why they're so far ahead in the polls... oh... wait a minute.
Nevertheless, apart from the their slogan not being as clear as the Tories, labour have had a decent start. Their polling has picked up when some thought it would drop further, Corbyn himself has not messed up, and they've got their policies out there.
Tories have also improved by about the same amount in the polls.
I'm not saying the Tories will not do well, but if the polling is right there will be no collapse that leads to an existential labour crisis. They were flirting with 25, now they regularly hit 31, and there's little reason to think more gaffes or bad stories will reduce them if the current ones haven't.
I just don't believe it. No way are Labour on 30%. Either I am, and many PBers, are completely reading the runes wrong, or there is going to need to be another polling inquiry if this keeps up.
I struggle to believe it as well - we've seen losses in labour areas which do not stack up with them essentially doing no worse than 2015, we know the infighting that has been there, is the core vote plus those terrified of a big Tory majority really 31%? That's what we're being told. I'm sure many of us have money on the assumption the polls are wrong again, but what if they're not?
Are the losses because they're on 30 (if they are) or because the Tories are 16-18 points clear?
One under-reported feature of the polls post-2015 is that there has been little Lab-Con direct swing. That has changed in the last few months but it still amounts to only about 3% at best. If the Greens have lost a little to Corbyn (very possible given the policy / style overlap and, probably, the fewer number of Green candidates - though that's less likely to be picked up in the polls yet), have gained some former LD-Leave voters back, and have gained some former UKIP voters back, I could well beleved that they could still be at around 30.
But the absolute change on 2015 in the Labour vote isn't particularly relevant if Con has put on 10-12%.
It's relevant in term of predicting a big loss vs a cataclysmic loss.
It really isn't. The size of the gap is the most important factor, followed by where the swing takes place, both geographically and socio-econimically. 30-48 will still be worse for Labour than 28-43.
The size of the gap was my point. 45-30 will be better, though still bad, than 45-25.
What Mrs May really needs is a few polls with the Tory lead down to single digits.
Or a good old Tory campaign coitus up.
Perhaps she can be recorded off mic calling voters thick, smelly, or bigots.
She already has a number of polls putting Labour on 31%, the same as last time. Confirms Nick Palmer's reports of the Labour vote holding steady.
I have to admit to being totally surprised that Labour is hitting circa 30% all the time now. They could 32-33 by the end of the campaign.
Actually, apart from Abbott's plane crash, things have gone relatively smoothly.
It does seem to be an amazing performance in the polls by Labour, despite the widespread ridiculing of its leader and increasingly so of his second in command, John McDonnell.
It does now appear entirely possible that Labour could end winning a larger share of the vote than they achieved in the 2015 GE. Were this to be the case, the party's hierarchy would no doubt claim that it was not so much Corbyn and his team who lost the GE for Labour, but rather UKIP and possibly the SNP to a lesser extent who had handed it on a plate to the Tories. We live in strange times.
A lot of people seem to have assumed Labour must do much worse than 2015 because Corbyn is much worse than Milliband and thus find 30% poll shares hard to believe.
But also a lot of people praised the Con 2015 message of vote Ed get Nicola. I think it was a big factor in delivering the Con majority. So the underlying Labour percentage may have been 33% say rather than the 31% they got. If that's true then it's possible for the Corbyn factor to have lost Labour 10% of its support and still have them polling at 30%. So there is no anomoly to explain.
Labour share at 30-35% available at 5/1 at Corals if you're tempted. I am but not going in right now. I also don't see Labour dropping below 150 seats. It could happen but I don't think it's likely.
Fair comment PY, I think it's also fair to add that were UKIP's share of the GB vote to collapse as expected from 13% in 2015 to around 5% in June 2017, then whilst the Tories will undoubtedly be the main beneficiary of this 8% windfall, it's probably the case that Labour will pick up something of the order of 20% of this vote shift from the Purple Team, i.e. +/- 1.6%.
I think the small number of candidates for UKIP means they will not break 3% of the votes cast. Stick another point or two on the blues.
'The utterly embarrassing, feckless, pathetic national disgrace that is Southern railways is the perfect case study. I'd venture that 60-80% of its users want it brought back under public control as a concession of TfL.'
Seems you have forgotten about the unions deliberately trying to trash the service.
Others seem to have forgotten that the Conservatives rushed through a botched salami sliced privatization in the death throws of the Major government.
Blair should have made it explicitly clear that his incoming government would have re-nationalized the railways without compensation. This would have killed Major's folly stone dead.
British Rail should have been privatized as one entity, with a substantial workers stake, and meaningful performance targets and staff bonuses and appropriate government subsidies where necessary.
Having one entity was against the EU's rules: the infrastructure and operations would have to have been separated.
There would also have been other issues, from the cultural, financial and operational.
BTW, my view is that the privatisation was botched, and done for ideological reasons that did not solve the problems. But we have what we have, and it has been a qualified success (e.g. a doubling of passengers, ten years without a passenger death on heavy rail). We need to improve on it - and if that invovles renationalisation, so be it. But all we are getting at the moment is ideology.
Paul Mason says that Labour are concentrating on education while the Tories are worrying about fox hunting.
I feel an advertising campain coming on.....
A very dumb one. I don't care about fox hunting but recognise many do, but framing it as a debate between fox killers and those who want to spend on education will only every appeal to people already set on who they will vote for.
If labour really are retaining practically all their 2015 vote, despite the constant infighting, then the labour brand is even stronger than thought, and truly impressive. I don't get such iron allegiance to a fluid, self contradicting entity like a political party, but tribalism is super strong.
As the rising Tory vote shows (and the Tory campaign plays to), a lot of people vote against parties under the FPTP system. There will be many people who do not like Corbyn, but who do not want to back May. Some of them will vote Labour, some (like me) will look elsewhere, a lot won't vote at all.
I still wait to see if the Labour vote really turns out. I'm thinking not so much, come the day.
I suspect you are right. I cannot see how Labour avoids an absolute shellacking in large parts of the country outside London. The Midlands are going to be horrific for the party, whatever Nick Palmer might say.
If labour really are retaining practically all their 2015 vote, despite the constant infighting, then the labour brand is even stronger than thought, and truly impressive. I don't get such iron allegiance to a fluid, self contradicting entity like a political party, but tribalism is super strong.
As the rising Tory vote shows (and the Tory campaign plays to), a lot of people vote against parties under the FPTP system. There will be many people who do not like Corbyn, but who do not want to back May. Some of them will vote Labour, some (like me) will look elsewhere, a lot won't vote at all.
I still wait to see if the Labour vote really turns out. I'm thinking not so much, come the day.
In 1983, despite Labour's worst post-wat result, there was a swing back of a few percent towards Labour in the last few days. We're not at that stage yet, but worth bearing in mind.
Paul Mason says that Labour are concentrating on education while the Tories are worrying about fox hunting.
I feel an advertising campain coming on.....
It's about getting stuff out of the way early. It's 3 weeks and 2 days since May called this election, and that feels like a lifetime ago, and it's 4 weeks from now to the big day.
If labour really are retaining practically all their 2015 vote, despite the constant infighting, then the labour brand is even stronger than thought, and truly impressive. I don't get such iron allegiance to a fluid, self contradicting entity like a political party, but tribalism is super strong.
As the rising Tory vote shows (and the Tory campaign plays to), a lot of people vote against parties under the FPTP system. There will be many people who do not like Corbyn, but who do not want to back May. Some of them will vote Labour, some (like me) will look elsewhere, a lot won't vote at all.
I still wait to see if the Labour vote really turns out. I'm thinking not so much, come the day.
That's the only question and the unknown one. Looking at the local elections last week Labour voting (in safe seats) was down approximately 20% on 2013.. The question is will the same hold true now or will it be even worse...
A lot of the public won't delve into the manifesto. They might pick up a general picture of re-nationalisation which will appeal to some and put off others. What almost everyone will hear about is that the Labour manifesto is 'leaked' and that will play into concerns about security, poor leadership and chaos.
Re Lab at 30%, that's not my experience locally. Big direct swings from Lab to Con, as well as from UKIP to Con. However:
1. Mary Creagh was (is) an arch-remainer and voting against invoking A50 has seriously annoyed a lot of Labour voters, as well as ex-UKIP voters who would be willing to vote tactically even Ukip wasn't a shambles.
2. There wasn't much of a Green / LD local vote or organisation, so the replacement votes that Labour might be picking up elsewhere don't exist to the same extent.
3. The local Labour council is not popular.
4. Corbyn remains a big issue on the doorstep with GE2015 Lab voters, and will prompt abstentions as well as defections.
However, I've not canvassed many 18-25s, so am perhaps just picking up what the polls are finding in the 45+ age-groups.
'The utterly embarrassing, feckless, pathetic national disgrace that is Southern railways is the perfect case study. I'd venture that 60-80% of its users want it brought back under public control as a concession of TfL.'
Seems you have forgotten about the unions deliberately trying to trash the service.
Others seem to have forgotten that the Conservatives rushed through a botched salami sliced privatization in the death throws of the Major government.
Blair should have made it explicitly clear that his incoming government would have re-nationalized the railways without compensation. This would have killed Major's folly stone dead.
British Rail should have been privatized as one entity, with a substantial workers stake, and meaningful performance targets and staff bonuses and appropriate government subsidies where necessary.
Ironically it is the EU that is all for vertical separation.
Which they then decide not to enforce in any meaningful way against certain countries. And one wonders why there's some cynicism around behaviours and the single market.
Paul Mason says that Labour are concentrating on education while the Tories are worrying about fox hunting.
I feel an advertising campain coming on.....
A very dumb one. I don't care about fox hunting but recognise many do, but framing it as a debate between fox killers and those who want to spend on education will only every appeal to people already set on who they will vote for.
Incorrect I'm afraid. Look at the simple connections made in Trump's campaign. Simple messages with a ring of truth are often the most powerful.
If labour really are retaining practically all their 2015 vote, despite the constant infighting, then the labour brand is even stronger than thought, and truly impressive. I don't get such iron allegiance to a fluid, self contradicting entity like a political party, but tribalism is super strong.
As the rising Tory vote shows (and the Tory campaign plays to), a lot of people vote against parties under the FPTP system. There will be many people who do not like Corbyn, but who do not want to back May. Some of them will vote Labour, some (like me) will look elsewhere, a lot won't vote at all.
I still wait to see if the Labour vote really turns out. I'm thinking not so much, come the day.
In 1983, despite Labour's worst post-wat result, there was a swing back of a few percent towards Labour in the last few days. We're not at that stage yet, but worth bearing in mind.
This Labour manifesto. Bloody hell. Is it real? If it is the polls will move over the next few days. Makes the longest suicide note look positively sensible. Telegraph absolutely monstering it today.
Who reads the fucking Telegraph ?
That seems unnecessary
Why, are only righties like SeanT allowed to swear?
Tories have also improved by about the same amount in the polls.
I'm not saying the Tories will not do well, but if the polling is right there will be no collapse that leads to an existential labour crisis. They were flirting with 25, now they regularly hit 31, and there's little reason to think more gaffes or bad stories will reduce them if the current ones haven't.
I just don't believe it. No way are Labour on 30%. Either I am, and many PBers, are completely reading the runes wrong, or there is going to need to be another polling inquiry if this keeps up.
I struggle to believe it as well - we've seen losses in labour areas which do not stack up with them essentially doing no worse than 2015, we know the infighting that has been there, is the core vote plus those terrified of a big Tory majority really 31%? That's what we're being told. I'm sure many of us have money on the assumption the polls are wrong again, but what if they're not?
Are the losses because they're on 30 (if they are) or because the Tories are 16-18 points clear?
One under-reported feature of the polls post-2015 is that there has been little Lab-Con direct swing. That has changed in the last few months but it still amounts to only about 3% at best. If the Greens have lost a little to Corbyn (very possible given the policy / style overlap and, probably, the fewer number of Green candidates - though that's less likely to be picked up in the polls yet), have gained some former LD-Leave voters back, and have gained some former UKIP voters back, I could well beleved that they could still be at around 30.
But the absolute change on 2015 in the Labour vote isn't particularly relevant if Con has put on 10-12%.
It's relevant in term of predicting a big loss vs a cataclysmic loss.
It really isn't. The size of the gap is the most important factor, followed by where the swing takes place, both geographically and socio-econimically. 30-48 will still be worse for Labour than 28-43.
The size of the gap was my point. 45-30 will be better, though still bad, than 45-25.
Fair enough. But the original comment was about Corbyn winning as big a share as Miliband or Brown, implying that Lab outside of Scotland ought to be doing about as well as in 2010/15.
This Labour manifesto. Bloody hell. Is it real? If it is the polls will move over the next few days. Makes the longest suicide note look positively sensible. Telegraph absolutely monstering it today.
Who reads the fucking Telegraph ?
That seems unnecessary
Why, are only righties like SeanT allowed to swear?
This Labour manifesto. Bloody hell. Is it real? If it is the polls will move over the next few days. Makes the longest suicide note look positively sensible. Telegraph absolutely monstering it today.
None of this is going to happen anyway, because Theresa May is going to be reelected (almost certainly!).
I was just trying to ask a question about people's views of renationalisation of the railways.
If you are old enough to remember British Rail it is unlikely you'd ask the question. As a nationalised industry it evidently believed its purpose was to provide employment to its staff and passengers were an irritating inconvenience. If you didn't like it tough luck. For those who don't remember pre-privatisation industries (3 months for a phone line, anyone? Then wait in the whole day in the forlorn hope an engineer would actually show up) I can understand the superficial attraction - but look at the responses of people who have actual experience of them.
It wasn't either great or awful, but anyway everyone has mnoved on (I can cite examples of terrible customer service in the private sector back then, and they're not unknown now). The ultra-efficient Passort Office is a good example of a public service (with a new IT system that was delivered on time) that works well. By and large, you get the same people working in the system either way. Real competition does sometimes help but the franchise system doesn't provide that. And if you don't like a hypothetical state-managed Southern you can vote out the bastards responsible for it. How do you vote out a private quasi-monopoly?
This is the nub of the argument - it's lazy, bloated nationalised industries dominated by trade unions that were the problem, not nationalisation 'per se'. It makes sense to run critical infrastructure centrally, because transport and energy has such a massive impact on the economy, environment, people's well-being. Plenty of other countries run efficient, quality critical infrastructure without descending into stereotypical 'Two-Ronnie' era BR customer service.
The main objection to nationalisation is from people who've bought all the neoliberal claptrap (from people lie the Taxpayer's Alliance) about things running more efficiently in private hands. The slightly harsher reality is that sometimes it does, sometimes it doesn't. You need a balance: I think telecomms does run better in private hands, but anyone who has sat in interminable traffic jams, or spent time on Southern Railways, or wonders why an island with the best wind, wave, tide resources in Europe still uses so much fossil fuels for energy knows that private capital does not always mean a better service. That's just ideological bollocks as extreme as nationalising everything.
If labour really are retaining practically all their 2015 vote, despite the constant infighting, then the labour brand is even stronger than thought, and truly impressive. I don't get such iron allegiance to a fluid, self contradicting entity like a political party, but tribalism is super strong.
As the rising Tory vote shows (and the Tory campaign plays to), a lot of people vote against parties under the FPTP system. There will be many people who do not like Corbyn, but who do not want to back May. Some of them will vote Labour, some (like me) will look elsewhere, a lot won't vote at all.
I still wait to see if the Labour vote really turns out. I'm thinking not so much, come the day.
I suspect you are right. I cannot see how Labour avoids an absolute shellacking in large parts of the country outside London. The Midlands are going to be horrific for the party, whatever Nick Palmer might say.
I agree the Midlands will be most brutal for Labour. I've always found the Midlands to be the most patriotic region of the country, when watching England away I'm always amazed by how many people you meet from Walsall, Lincoln, Tamworth, Stafford etc
When the topic turns to patriotism and security (my guess is in a couple of weeks), when the IRA and Hamas quotes and pictures are reeled out, and Lynton unleashes everything he's been sitting on - well I think it spells disaster for Labour in these types of places. I do think the losses will be substantial to the point where at least one West Bromwich seat will go blue.
A lot of the public won't delve into the manifesto. They might pick up a general picture of re-nationalisation which will appeal to some and put off others. What almost everyone will hear about is that the Labour manifesto is 'leaked' and that will play into concerns about security, poor leadership and chaos.
Hmmm.....If this 'leaked' manifesto is not a hoax then it will be torn to pieces over the coming days by every non-lefty news outlet. And the MSM will probably report the outraged reaction it is going to foster. I suspect what the largely non-attentive public will hear is 'Labour are communists'.
Paul Mason says that Labour are concentrating on education while the Tories are worrying about fox hunting.
I feel an advertising campain coming on.....
A very dumb one. I don't care about fox hunting but recognise many do, but framing it as a debate between fox killers and those who want to spend on education will only every appeal to people already set on who they will vote for.
Incorrect I'm afraid. Look at the simple connections made in Trump's campaign. Simple messages with a ring of truth are often the most powerful.
Well for a start it isn't true that one side is focusing on Foxes and the other education - I'm going to take a wild guess that the Tory plans will mention education more than Foxes - and I'm just sceptical enough people give a crap about foxes to pretend that that is going to be the case. How will that resonate more than the inevitable 'x days to save the NHS' stuff?
Maybe it will be effective, we shall see, but it would be a very very dumb message, and not even close to true I'd bet - no more than if Corbyn's message is portrayed in a campaign as identical to marxism.
If labour really are retaining practically all their 2015 vote, despite the constant infighting, then the labour brand is even stronger than thought, and truly impressive. I don't get such iron allegiance to a fluid, self contradicting entity like a political party, but tribalism is super strong.
As the rising Tory vote shows (and the Tory campaign plays to), a lot of people vote against parties under the FPTP system. There will be many people who do not like Corbyn, but who do not want to back May. Some of them will vote Labour, some (like me) will look elsewhere, a lot won't vote at all.
I still wait to see if the Labour vote really turns out. I'm thinking not so much, come the day.
In 1983, despite Labour's worst post-wat result, there was a swing back of a few percent towards Labour in the last few days. We're not at that stage yet, but worth bearing in mind.
That's a big assumption when the entire industry concluded that under-recording Tories was the usual error.
The final batch of polls all came in at 25-26%. The GE result for Labour was 28% - equivalent to 29% on a comparable ex-NI basis. The consensus view at the time was that the expected Tory landslide pushed voters back to Labour in the final few days. Whether history repeats itself we'll have to see.
The nationalisation debate will be interesting but go nowhere. Having spent about half my career in the pharmaceutical industry and nearly half in the civil service my experience is that the private sector is more efficient, but the nationalised sector is more comfortable to work in.
So your view will depend on whether you're a consumer or worker. Although with Jezza in charge, the number of workers in nationalised industries might soon be more than the number of consumers.
If labour really are retaining practically all their 2015 vote, despite the constant infighting, then the labour brand is even stronger than thought, and truly impressive. I don't get such iron allegiance to a fluid, self contradicting entity like a political party, but tribalism is super strong.
As the rising Tory vote shows (and the Tory campaign plays to), a lot of people vote against parties under the FPTP system. There will be many people who do not like Corbyn, but who do not want to back May. Some of them will vote Labour, some (like me) will look elsewhere, a lot won't vote at all.
I still wait to see if the Labour vote really turns out. I'm thinking not so much, come the day.
In 1983, despite Labour's worst post-wat result, there was a swing back of a few percent towards Labour in the last few days. We're not at that stage yet, but worth bearing in mind.
That's a big assumption when the entire industry concluded that under-recording Tories was the usual error.
The final batch of polls all came in at 25-26%. The GE result for Labour was 28% - equivalent to 29% on a comparable ex-NI basis. The consensus view at the time was that the expected Tory landslide pushed voters back to Labour in the final few days. Whether history repeats itself we'll have to see.
There is no evidence there that a swing occurred during the days running up to the GE. It could have changed on the day itself, but that was not what was claimed.
Paul Mason says that Labour are concentrating on education while the Tories are worrying about fox hunting.
I feel an advertising campain coming on.....
A very dumb one. I don't care about fox hunting but recognise many do, but framing it as a debate between fox killers and those who want to spend on education will only every appeal to people already set on who they will vote for.
Incorrect I'm afraid. Look at the simple connections made in Trump's campaign. Simple messages with a ring of truth are often the most powerful.
Well for a start it isn't true that one side is focusing on Foxes and the other education - I'm going to take a wild guess that the Tory plans will mention education more than Foxes - and I'm just sceptical enough people give a crap about foxes to pretend that that is going to be the case. How will that resonate more than the inevitable 'x days to save the NHS' stuff?
The foxhunting reference won't win any votes for the Tories since CA types mostly vote Tory already. There is opposition to hunting out in the shires and the LibDems will probably pick up a few more votes as a consequence.
A lot of the public won't delve into the manifesto. They might pick up a general picture of re-nationalisation which will appeal to some and put off others. What almost everyone will hear about is that the Labour manifesto is 'leaked' and that will play into concerns about security, poor leadership and chaos.
Hmmm.....If this 'leaked' manifesto is not a hoax then it will be torn to pieces over the coming days by every non-lefty news outlet. And the MSM will probably report the outraged reaction it is going to foster. I suspect what the largely non-attentive public will hear is 'Labour are communists'.
It's often the small things, the weird policies about LGBT smokers, TV diversity and puppy sales that the press can used as attack lines that will be chime with the public. for the Tories I think Corbyn is best ridiculed rather than trying to engage in ideological arguments.
This Labour manifesto. Bloody hell. Is it real? If it is the polls will move over the next few days. Makes the longest suicide note look positively sensible. Telegraph absolutely monstering it today.
Who reads the fucking Telegraph ?
I do.. The paper edition twice a week and online for free..
I also read the Grauniad, The D Mail, Th Mirros and the Sub.. the latter take 2 minutes each each. All on line.
The Telegraph has lots of faults. So do the rest.
I suspect you're a typical Left winger who cannot stand reading opinions that conflict with your beliefs... :-)
And on what basis do you suppose that a typical left winger can't stand reading opinions that conflict with their beliefs?
Because they are no different than typical right wingers, I'd guess.
This Labour manifesto. Bloody hell. Is it real? If it is the polls will move over the next few days. Makes the longest suicide note look positively sensible. Telegraph absolutely monstering it today.
Who reads the fucking Telegraph ?
That seems unnecessary
Why, are only righties like SeanT allowed to swear?
It literally added nothing.
Whereras SeanT's do?
I doubt that breathlessly reporting that the Telegraph was monstering the Labour manifesto added much to the sum of human knowledge either.
(2) Voters aren't universally impressed by the strength and stability offered by TMT.
How many PMs in the last 25 years have had better ratings?
A question to be taken seriously, so poked around the IPSOS Mori archive as they have been asking essentially the same satisfaction question since the 1970's. Theresa May's ratings are good, but not unusually good. For example only 4% higher satisfaction than Cameron at the same point in his premiership.
Paul Mason says that Labour are concentrating on education while the Tories are worrying about fox hunting.
I feel an advertising campain coming on.....
A very dumb one. I don't care about fox hunting but recognise many do, but framing it as a debate between fox killers and those who want to spend on education will only every appeal to people already set on who they will vote for.
Incorrect I'm afraid. Look at the simple connections made in Trump's campaign. Simple messages with a ring of truth are often the most powerful.
Well for a start it isn't true that one side is focusing on Foxes and the other education - I'm going to take a wild guess that the Tory plans will mention education more than Foxes - and I'm just sceptical enough people give a crap about foxes to pretend that that is going to be the case. How will that resonate more than the inevitable 'x days to save the NHS' stuff?
The foxhunting reference won't win any votes for the Tories since CA types mostly vote Tory already. There is opposition to hunting out in the shires and the LibDems will probably pick up a few more votes as a consequence.
Oh I know people care about it - but it is certainly not a truth that one side is focusing on killing foxes and the other education, even if the Tories do put in a free vote onthe matter in their manifesto (and I'm sure they will). Maybe it will be effective to some degree, though I'm sceptical, but for one thing the plan is for people to vote Labour because of it, not LD, and for another, it will still be dumb to portray the choice as between fox killers and the saints giving money to education, as though the former is the key part of the Tory campaign message, the main thing.
This Labour manifesto. Bloody hell. Is it real? If it is the polls will move over the next few days. Makes the longest suicide note look positively sensible. Telegraph absolutely monstering it today.
Who reads the fucking Telegraph ?
That seems unnecessary
Why, are only righties like SeanT allowed to swear?
It literally added nothing.
Whereras SeanT's do?
I doubt that breathlessly reporting that the Telegraph was monstering the Labour manifesto added much to the sum of human knowledge either.
No, although they usually take up a far smaller fraction of the total word count so less egregiously unnecessary.
If labour really are retaining practically all their 2015 vote, despite the constant infighting, then the labour brand is even stronger than thought, and truly impressive. I don't get such iron allegiance to a fluid, self contradicting entity like a political party, but tribalism is super strong.
As the rising Tory vote shows (and the Tory campaign plays to), a lot of people vote against parties under the FPTP system. There will be many people who do not like Corbyn, but who do not want to back May. Some of them will vote Labour, some (like me) will look elsewhere, a lot won't vote at all.
I still wait to see if the Labour vote really turns out. I'm thinking not so much, come the day.
In 1983, despite Labour's worst post-wat result, there was a swing back of a few percent towards Labour in the last few days. We're not at that stage yet, but worth bearing in mind.
That's a big assumption when the entire industry concluded that under-recording Tories was the usual error.
The final batch of polls all came in at 25-26%. The GE result for Labour was 28% - equivalent to 29% on a comparable ex-NI basis. The consensus view at the time was that the expected Tory landslide pushed voters back to Labour in the final few days. Whether history repeats itself we'll have to see.
You could make a coherent argument out of 3 data points - 1983, 1992, 2015 - that people decide in the final week what result they expect (rather than want) and act accordingly. Con landslide -> it is safe to vote Labour, Lab victory on the cards -> perhaps Lab vote not such a good plan.
will there be a central resource of nominations after 4pm today? I'm wondering where the best place will be to see where UKIP are standing. or more importantly, where they aren't.
This Labour manifesto. Bloody hell. Is it real? If it is the polls will move over the next few days. Makes the longest suicide note look positively sensible. Telegraph absolutely monstering it today.
Who reads the fucking Telegraph ?
That seems unnecessary
Why, are only righties like SeanT allowed to swear?
It literally added nothing.
I disagree, it conveyed a sense of severe rattlement on the part of the poster which I rather enjoyed.
"One under-reported feature of the polls post-2015 is that there has been little Lab-Con direct swing. That has changed in the last few months but it still amounts to only about 3% at best."
(2) Voters aren't universally impressed by the strength and stability offered by TMT.
How many PMs in the last 25 years have had better ratings?
A question to be taken seriously, so poked around the IPSOS Mori archive as they have been asking essentially the same satisfaction question since the 1970's. Theresa May's ratings are good, but not unusually good. For example only 4% higher satisfaction than Cameron at the same point in his premiership.
Edit James Callaghan had much better ratings way back when, until the Winter of Discontent
This Labour manifesto. Bloody hell. Is it real? If it is the polls will move over the next few days. Makes the longest suicide note look positively sensible. Telegraph absolutely monstering it today.
Who reads the fucking Telegraph ?
Rather more than read the Guardian or any other broadsheet.
The Guardian and (ouch) the Mail have the largest online readership of any newspapers in the WORLD. Don't go by dead tree circulation.
That's true, although how much of the Mail's online readership is just checking in to celeb gossip? While that won't be quite as true for the Guardian, I'd still guess that the average time spent reading online is far less than those who buy a dead-tree copy.
Not being a Times subscriber, I turn to the Guardian for actual news. At least I understand its left-wing bias and can discount it. By the same token I don't read the Telegraph because I don't know how bonkers out there right wing it is to be able to apply a similar discount.
The Mail? Have you seen what Kim Kardashian is up to these days?
Comments
I also read the Grauniad, The D Mail, Th Mirros and the Sub.. the latter take 2 minutes each each. All on line.
The Telegraph has lots of faults. So do the rest.
I suspect you're a typical Left winger who cannot stand reading opinions that conflict with your beliefs... :-)
There is not a chance in hell that a Corbyn Labour Party is going to hold the labour vote steady. Nick's campaigning experience in 2015 suggested a Labour victory and we all remember how that one went. The Labour vote will be around 25%, so do your sums about how big May's majority will be.
In addition, there are issues with areas well outside London having their services decided upon by TfL which, as non-London voters, they have no control over.
But leaving that aside, your posts from last night amused me. For one thing, you talk about the concession for London Overground. If you like it so much, why not convert the franchises into concessions rather than just nationalise?
If anything, a right wing Lab MP should be pushing for more ludicrous stuff in the manifesto.
It's an entirely selfish view, but politics generally is.
I have never read a worse or more incoherent article by a paid professional journalist; you'd expect proper political commentary to shine by comparison with the online amateur competition, but instead here is this bloke writing: "Could Brexit be followed by, god help us, “Frexit”? For a certain type of Englishman there was something priapic about even thinking so." That is below-the-line, Guardian c.i.f. stuff. Ignore.
He's making Labour HIS labour and making it harder and harder to tack back centrewards.
'The utterly embarrassing, feckless, pathetic national disgrace that is Southern railways is the perfect case study. I'd venture that 60-80% of its users want it brought back under public control as a concession of TfL.'
Seems you have forgotten about the unions deliberately trying to trash the service.
Private cars will be a thing of the past within 30 years if not sooner.....once driverless vehicles are established
(1) No-one thinks Corbyn's lot will win. The paradox illustrated by the leaflet in the header.
(2) Voters aren't universally impressed by the strength and stability offered by TMT.
One under-reported feature of the polls post-2015 is that there has been little Lab-Con direct swing. That has changed in the last few months but it still amounts to only about 3% at best. If the Greens have lost a little to Corbyn (very possible given the policy / style overlap and, probably, the fewer number of Green candidates - though that's less likely to be picked up in the polls yet), have gained some former LD-Leave voters back, and have gained some former UKIP voters back, I could well beleved that they could still be at around 30.
But the absolute change on 2015 in the Labour vote isn't particularly relevant if Con has put on 10-12%.
You're right of course, I'm just miffed I'm not allowed to drive, and my partner not driving compounds it. Walking is overrated when it's further than the city!
Vote share means diddly squat here (And to the septics), ask Hillary Clinton.
UKIP, the Greens and the Lib Dems are all doing badly. The signs are that the SNP and Plaid will also go backwards compared to 2015.
What we are getting from Labour is a dogmatic, ideological policy to renationalise, when it is far from clear that will help solve the problems. By all means look at it and alternative models; but it needs the problems defining and solutions found for the problems, rather than ideology.
If you think privatisation for ideological reasons was wrong, why is nationaisation for ideological reasons okay?
Along with EC and Eurostar, you might also want to mention the other privatised TOCs who are doing an excellent job at returning money to the taxpayer.
Blair should have made it explicitly clear that his incoming government would have re-nationalized the railways without compensation. This would have killed Major's folly stone dead.
British Rail should have been privatized as one entity, with a substantial workers stake, and meaningful performance targets and staff bonuses and appropriate government subsidies where necessary.
That's 3 million odd votes which need re-distributing, so it just needs a change in mindset as to what the numbers mean.
Anyway, I've got to go just as we get onto talking about railways ...
"Party of the many, not the Jew"
Quite
Shami, you might need to do a little more work on this one.
Also some very unhappy Labour campers on the treatment handed out to that vet.
I feel an advertising campain coming on.....
There would also have been other issues, from the cultural, financial and operational.
BTW, my view is that the privatisation was botched, and done for ideological reasons that did not solve the problems. But we have what we have, and it has been a qualified success (e.g. a doubling of passengers, ten years without a passenger death on heavy rail). We need to improve on it - and if that invovles renationalisation, so be it. But all we are getting at the moment is ideology.
1. Mary Creagh was (is) an arch-remainer and voting against invoking A50 has seriously annoyed a lot of Labour voters, as well as ex-UKIP voters who would be willing to vote tactically even Ukip wasn't a shambles.
2. There wasn't much of a Green / LD local vote or organisation, so the replacement votes that Labour might be picking up elsewhere don't exist to the same extent.
3. The local Labour council is not popular.
4. Corbyn remains a big issue on the doorstep with GE2015 Lab voters, and will prompt abstentions as well as defections.
However, I've not canvassed many 18-25s, so am perhaps just picking up what the polls are finding in the 45+ age-groups.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WjBHUQEiTPw
http://www.msn.com/en-gb/news/uknews/the-great-british-brexit-robbery-how-our-democracy-was-hijacked/ar-BBAPsSG?ocid=NL_ENGB_A1_OM2-PID85413
The main objection to nationalisation is from people who've bought all the neoliberal claptrap (from people lie the Taxpayer's Alliance) about things running more efficiently in private hands. The slightly harsher reality is that sometimes it does, sometimes it doesn't. You need a balance: I think telecomms does run better in private hands, but anyone who has sat in interminable traffic jams, or spent time on Southern Railways, or wonders why an island with the best wind, wave, tide resources in Europe still uses so much fossil fuels for energy knows that private capital does not always mean a better service. That's just ideological bollocks as extreme as nationalising everything.
When the topic turns to patriotism and security (my guess is in a couple of weeks), when the IRA and Hamas quotes and pictures are reeled out, and Lynton unleashes everything he's been sitting on - well I think it spells disaster for Labour in these types of places. I do think the losses will be substantial to the point where at least one West Bromwich seat will go blue.
Maybe it will be effective, we shall see, but it would be a very very dumb message, and not even close to true I'd bet - no more than if Corbyn's message is portrayed in a campaign as identical to marxism.
The final batch of polls all came in at 25-26%. The GE result for Labour was 28% - equivalent to 29% on a comparable ex-NI basis. The consensus view at the time was that the expected Tory landslide pushed voters back to Labour in the final few days. Whether history repeats itself we'll have to see.
So your view will depend on whether you're a consumer or worker. Although with Jezza in charge, the number of workers in nationalised industries might soon be more than the number of consumers.
I doubt that breathlessly reporting that the Telegraph was monstering the Labour manifesto added much to the sum of human knowledge either.
There was recently a couple of published polls with transition proportions from 2015 which distinguished Leavers from Remainers, namely: a poll reported in the Guardian,
https://www.theguardian.com/science/2017/apr/27/lib-dems-shouldnt-count-on-remain-votes-the-data-looks-bleak
... and a YouGov poll,
https://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.net/cumulus_uploads/document/i70tdeyvag/InternalResults_170420_Demographics_all_W.pdf
What these polls show is that that for Labour Remainers 5% in both polls would switch to Con, while for Leavers 17% (Guardian) or 24% (YouGov) would do so.
The Mail? Have you seen what Kim Kardashian is up to these days?