Categories
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Jeremy Corbyn is an unconventional politician, the normal rule
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Jeremy Corbyn is an unconventional politician, the normal rules of politics and polling don’t apply to him
There’s been quite a lot of comment about Jeremy Corbyn’s Labour not polling well enough against the Tories to ensure he becomes Prime Minister after the next general election. But my hypothesis is that the only time we shouldn’t judge Corbyn in periods outside of a general election campaign.
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
Here we have leaders like... oh, wait...
I suspect he’s bluffing.
http://bruxelles.blogs.liberation.fr/2018/03/03/selmayrgate-une-commission-en-coupe-reglee/
https://tinyurl.com/yd4yp8kg
Completely unaccountable, unelected, and the first item on their agenda is feathering their own nests and those around them. How does a political appointee ever end up running the permanent staff with so little process followed?
CCHQ surely can't be that bad again. Otoh, Brexit.
May isn't the leader to do that. And the people lining up to replace her - e.g. Boris or JRM, or outsiders like Hammond - are not either.
Why has Corbyn captured so many people (admittedly as well as repelling others)? He has a vision, and has rarely swayed from that vision. He has a certainty that things *can* be better for *me* (where *me* is an average Joe on the street). Things aren't working for *me*, and he says he'll get them working for *me*.
Many people won't look at the details of the vision, and besides, many of the things you and I see as negatives are historic irrelevances to many voters. Why do soundbites and labels matter in politics? Because most people don't have time to look into every little detail, and therefore rely on the broad-brush details. Hence why the the manifesto commitments on adult social care are forgotten, but the 'dementia tax' is remembered.
Certainty matters. Vision inspire. And Corbyn has certainty and vision by the gallon, mainly because he is uncaring about the realities of the world.
So how do the Conservatives fight this? By having a vision, and delivering good government for the average Joe *now*, whilst they have power.
Yep, the Conservatives are screwed.
I see there was some discussion on the previous thread about BBC Brexit bias...
https://twitter.com/rcorbettmep/status/969343499937243136
Oh wait...
Want to talk about the EU and how it operates? Let's get some people who work there on the show, perhaps...
https://twitter.com/damocrat/status/969950820300214275
Her conference speech that certain metropolitan Remain supporters took to be about themselves, was actually about the Googles and Facebooks, the Richard Bransons and Philip Greens who make a lot of money in the UK and pay very little in taxes on it. Mrs May wants to be able to cut taxes for the average man in the street before the next election.
I'm going to guess we'll see something on this in the forthcoming Spring Statement from the Chancellor.
The Conservatives are in power and need to deliver. But they can deliver according to a central vision for the country. They are not.
And if they do not, Labour will create a vision of what the Conservatives want - one of forced servitude, dark clouds and perpetual rain, and hooray-Henrys pursuing poor peasants for sport. It's never good to let your opponents set your narrative.
Blair managed to sell a vision for the country that got him into power. He managed to maintain that vision for over five years before the fraud started to be uncovered. It is possible.
Don’t the parties get to nominate the guests for QT anyway, so for every Dan Hannan there’s also a Ken Clarke, for every JRM an Amber Rudd?
I see the problem.
"Her conference speech that certain metropolitan Remain supporters took to be about themselves, was actually about ..."
And that highlights another problem perfectly. If you're having to interpret such a speech, to tell people what it really means, and you're on the side of the speech-giver, then it's a failure.
Besides, it can't be done in one speech. It has to be done consistently over time, so the message seeps through and enough of the public start believing that you believe it. Keep on bashing the message, and get your team to do the same.
I'm also fearful that 'cutting taxes for the average man in the street' is not a vote-winner. The other side of that is 'reducing public services', and they've already suffered big hits, and those hits are often very unpopular. It's time for austerity to end.
If I were the Conservatives, I might be tempted to go for slight tax increases with the message: "The public services have been hit. We'll tax the rich / big organisations more highly, but we will spend it more wisely than Labour." Try to offset those tax rises with other measures to counteract negative effects. But it's the message, the vision, that matters.
Then again, that's my sort of wish, so I'm biased.
https://twitter.com/eberlmat/status/969605258090631168
Oh...
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/unitedkingdom/en/your-meps/european_elections/results.html
I don't think things are going to get quite so bad as that (although I suppose with Trump you can never tell).
A withdrawal from the 2020 race before the primary season would be my guess.
On foreign affairs, it is pro-Ukraine and anti-Russia, and pro-Saudi and hostile to their opponents, e.g. in Iran, Yemen and Syria, where it describes the legitimate government as the Assad regime.
It is also a strong supporter/promoter of multi-culturalism, ethnic diversity and sexual deviation. For example, the choice of speakers on Radio 4's "Thought for the Day" does not reflect the predominant WASP composition of the British population.
All assuming we don't get a soft Brexit which could throw up a different sort of considerations.
If the plan was to protect the US steel industry from subsidised steel, he could have introduced targeted tariffs, focusing on places where steel has significant government support (like... errrr... China).
If he wanted general protection, he could have updated the US tariff schedule so that tariffs for non-FTA countries (like China and the EU) were higher.
Those would have been perfectly sensible, legitimate ways to achieve his goal. (If his goal was protection of the US steel industry.)
Instead he announced an across the board 25% tariff for steel, including for partners (like Canada) with whom the US had an FTA. Why? It's certainly in breach of the terms of NAFTA. The Canadian steel industry is essentially all owned by Nucor and US Steel anyway. The mini-mills around the Great Lakes are often buying US power anyway. It makes no sense unless you wanted to really piss off your closest ally, and say to the world "hey, having a free trade agreement with us means nothing".
https://www.thenational.ae/opinion/comment/in-the-pessimistic-west-an-aura-of-negativity-feeds-into-a-growing-political-divide-1.709389
Farage reinforces their anti-Brexitness. But many of us voted to Leave in spite of Farage, not because of him. He is a publicity whore who is guaanteed to answer the Beebs phone calls. The people you would REALLY want on Question Time - say Boris or Gove - just think "Why should I bother? I know they just want my political assassination. Fuck 'em."
Oh, and it’s “The Failing New York Times”.
The other aspect is he has been a powerful bully for sometime in his life before the Whitehouse and it worked. Now he can be the worlds most powerful bully as president and maybe in some ways his bullying has had results. Maybe the idea is to bluster threaten even start the trade war in some small way and then demand concessions.
My last thought is the more the liberals, or anyone not Trump screams and shouts about his actions the more the base lap it up, so in some ways the crazier the better for Trump.
*I'm personally interested, but not so much Trump and I feel a lot of his voters.
1. Cock up. It's a tweet that he's forced to make policy of.
2. Conspiracy. He wants to make it perfectly clear that he doesn't think the US is (or should be) bound by historic treaty commitments*.
I genuinely don't know which one it is. I'm tempted by 1, but fear the answer is more likely 2.
* Of course, if it's 2, then it's a bit rich that he's also complaining that Germany isn't spending 2% of GDP on defence.
"Donald Trump has announced tariffs of 25% on imported steel" - and of course "our very good allies, who we have an agreement with, Canada, who buy a lot of our electricity and oil to make their steel with, are not included". Indeed, he wouldn't even need to add the second part. It goes without saying.
Feb 1974 - "Who governs Britain?" Not you, Ted.
Oct 1974 - OK, Harold, have your majority. Just. Cuz we still don't really trust you.
1979 - See, unburied dead, crisis, what crisis? - we were wise to clip Labour's wings. Let the Lady have a go.
1983 - and another
1987 - and yet another
1992 - yeah, she'd definitely outworn her welcome. But Kinnock? "Alriiiiiiiiigghhhht!" - not
1997 - Now THAT's what I call a refreshing face! Luv yer, Tony!
2001 - still luv yer Tony.
2005 - er, it's not exactly love, Tony. You were lucky you were facing Michael Howard, and not some fresh faced Tory with better ideas.
2010 - yeah like that - Cameron. But even so, still don't entirely trust him. Give that nice Mister Clegg a role.
2015 - ....what shits the LibDems are. Have a majority Dave.
2017 - PM Corbyn? Hur hur hur....but admit it, we scared you, Theresa!
2022 - Labour discovers the electroate is like a cat toying with a mouse.....
Aram Kurd, 33, of Leicester, Hawkar Hassan, 32, of Coventry and Arkan Ali, 37, of Oldham, have all been charged with five counts of manslaughter and with arson with intent to endanger life.
They will be held in custody during the weekend and will appear before Leicester Magistrates on Monday.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5458311/Three-charged-Leicester-explosion.html
Titter ....
He campaigned very effectively last time. However, we must also acknowledge he was aided by the worst Conservative campaign in living memory, and the media asking tough questions like "Will you keep your allotment?" rather than "How will you raise countless hundreds of billions to nationalise everything?".
F1 testing resumes in two days. Until then, we have to make do with the Italian and German results today (election and SDP referendum respectively).
One never knows quite how good or not someone will be as a party leader in an election until after the event but Estey Mcvey as a former TV presenter has scope as does Johnnie Mercer`
Ruth Davidson may be over hyped.No guarantee she would appeal to middle England.She might put them off
Lots of people like Corbyn's general vision, as you say, but without illusions that it'll all be perfect - they just feel that it's time Britain paid a bit more attention to struggling ordinary people. They would, I think, be willing to give a fair hearing to a Tory direction too. But there really isn't one, except Brexit, Brexit, Brexit, plus the occasional speech on something else that doesn't lead to anything specific. Quite apart from Corbyn, the Tories don't seem to realise that the next election will probably be fought after Brexit.
They're intellectually exhausted and need a period in opposition to sort themselves out in one direction or another. We were just the same in 2010.
Sounds familiar.
Trump just started another large fundraising drive for 2020, and campaign staff are being appointed. He might not much enjoy being president, but he loves campaigning.
I was a bit puzzzled by the Lear comparison - it's not as though the entire Shakespearean family were a bunch of grifters.
As indeed is true of Quangos and the NHS.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-43276732
I’m proud of our history...... well sone of it ...... and I delight in our countryside, and some at least of our traditions.
And I’m always there for at least one of the British teams in sporting encounters.
Mr Selmayr has just been appointed to head the permanent staff from a politically appointed position as Junker’s Chief of Staff.
Imagine if Lynton Crosby had been appointed to replace Gus O’Donnell, that’s why there’s an outcry over this appointment.
Not as bad as my decision not to hedge a Con majority of 50-75 seats, though.
I am (slightly) surprised that this affair hasn't been better reported - but there again our reporting of European news has been consistently poor.
(Edit - search 'selmayrgate' for U.K. links, and see just how few you get (basically Politico)).
The tone is more Ubu Roi.
"Nimby councils" in England that fail to build enough new homes could be stripped of planning powers, Housing Secretary Sajid Javid has warned.
Mr Javid told the Sunday Times he would be "breathing down" the necks of local authorities to ensure targets are met.
I do hope Mr Javid hasn't been opposing developments in his own backyard.
(It's not as though his past is going away - or indeed that the press will forget about it.)
Corbyn is less good at converting Tories to Labour, hence the Tories got 42% at the general election, their highest total since 1983 and are still consistently polling 40% or above
I find it somewhat ironic that those who support the highest levels of immigration also support the lowest levels of housebuilding in their own backyard - yet are simultaneously mad at the government that their offspring can’t afford to buy in Zone 2 before they turn 25.
https://twitter.com/Andrew_Adonis/status/969984439903191040?s=20
My guess is that Trump wants to "fix" the US/China balance of trade and the only way to do so 8s to single out China, going against WTO rules on tariffs. This way when he moves to do that the nation's who have been "reprieved" won't say anything when the hammer still falls on China.
I also think he's likely to target the EU at some level, maybe even Germany specifically. My guess is this is all based on the numbers. China and Germany are without a doubt the worst offenders in a free trade system, in their own ways.
More so than with any politician I think you have to almost completely ignore what he says and look at what he does.
His business career is littered with threatening law suits - but he doesn’t follow through.
Saying he will give money to charity - but he doesn’t do it.
The Conservatives need to show how Jeremy Corbyn’s past is a problem for policy in the present for those not so far convinced.
It looks like he's going to get both. Anyone with investments in the UK should sell now.
http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/some-tories-would-rather-jeremy-corbyn-was-prime-minister-than-see-brexit-happen-claims-lord-heseltine_uk_5a9914d5e4b089ec35390227
In general it's a mistake to to generalise about people who don't currently vote for you - it's like Remainers caricaturing Leavers as being thick. Metatron's core vote - ostentatiously patriotic, wary of pop culure and immigrants, dubious even about Tories who are gay - is already solidly Tory. In order to win an election, the Tories need to keep a channel of communication with the rest of us.