politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Corbyn’s the one that’s most out of line with his party on Bre

First.

Corbyn has not said 'right to leave', merely 'I accept the will of the majority;. Important difference.

DavidL said:

PeterC said:

First.

Corbyn has not said 'right to leave', merely 'I accept the will of the majority;. Important difference.

As have the remainers in the Tory party by and large.

So how does this become an issue for him, exactly? I can see that disappointed remainers would like to have Labour leading the charge against Brexit but it seems to me that a significant minority of those who voted remain have also moved on. Corbyn will attack the government on the detail, not the principle and most Labour supporters will struggle to tell the difference.

That's about right.

He just needs to make sure the Tories continue to own Brexit, which he can do in exactly the way you describe. Win/win for him.

PeterC said:

Corbyn has not said 'right to leave', merely 'I accept the will of the majority;. Important difference.

It`s very easy for him to "accept the will of the majority", if that is what he wanted all along, in order to be able to bring about his socialist revolution.

Really, it`s just a cop out.

PClipp said:

PeterC said:

Corbyn has not said 'right to leave', merely 'I accept the will of the majority;. Important difference.

It`s very easy for him to "accept the will of the majority", if that is what he wanted all along, in order to be able to bring about his socialist revolution.

Really, it`s just a cop out.

No I think that the dice have just landed well for him.

Good morning, everyone.

If Corbyn can continue when over 85% of his MPs sign a motion of no confidence, I don't see why he can't continue now.

Don't get me wrong, replacing Corbyn with a non-demented MP would be a fantastic result for both Labour and the country (assuming they didn't kowtow to the socialist Three Pounders), I just don't see it happening.

"In the election campaign Labour was never subject to proper scrutiny because the widespread assumption was that the party was irrelevant. The Tories were going to be returned with a big majority.

I think this is the point that should inform all thinking on the possibility of a Corbyn/old Left GE win, at any point in the future. The debate about how economies and societies work had been largely silent for 25 years, Corbyn raised it but he was deemed unelectable so nobody actually bothered to make the argument for liberal economics and the restriction of state power/interference - as they once had successfully in the 80's.

With that argument back in swing, and the thought that Corbyn could actually be elected, I don't see anywhere for Labour to improve their vote share, or any Conservatives who would sit on their hands and abstain.

daodao said:

I switched my vote back from UKIP to Labour at GE2017 in the belief that Labour now agreed that Brexit, with withdrawal from the single market and customs union, has to be implemented. The behaviour of Umunna et al in trying to undermine this agreed Labour party position, and in doing so sabotage the Labour party, disgusts me.

"...this agreed Labour party position"?

When was it agreed, and by whom?

Asking for a friend, of course.....

This is LAB's official policy on Brexit as agreed by conference

https://twitter.com/MikeGapes/status/889796005981544449

Would it be fair to say that the Duke of Edinburgh's profile is a little less contemporary than her majesties?

http://www.standard.co.uk/news/uk/new-5-coin-unveiled-to-mark-duke-of-edinburghs-retirement-from-royal-duties-a3603246.html

MikeSmithson said:

This is LAB's official policy on Brexit as agreed by conference

https://twitter.com/MikeGapes/status/889796005981544449

Whatever the Labour rule book says, in reality it's the manifesto that counts. I don't recall that advocating a second referendum or general election.

Recidivist said:

rottenborough said:

MikeSmithson said:

This is LAB's official policy on Brexit as agreed by conference

https://twitter.com/MikeGapes/status/889796005981544449

"acceptable" is a rather ambiguous word.

Which word would you suggest?

No idea, too early in the morning. I was just pointing that Corbyn could say it was "acceptable" even if a hard Brexit. I would expect the policy would spell out what acceptable might mean elsewhere in the section.

Miss Vance, quite.

If so many RemainLabour voters were super-concerned about Brexit, then.....why did they vote Labour, rather than the LibDems?

Maybe the theory that "they thought Labour were the best possible shot of preventing Brexit" would make some sense in Lab-Con marginals where people were tactically making sure the Tories didn't get in, but the theory really falls down in those Lib-Lab marginals - Sheffield Hallam, Cambridge, Hornsey, Bermondsey, Manc Withington, Cardiff Central, etc. - all seats which voted Remain by massive margins and where there was no chance of the Tories winning, and therefore where Remainers could theoretically have voted LibDem on principle to express their views on Brexit without risking the Tories getting in. But instead, there were huge swings to Labour in every one of those seats.

RoyalBlue said:

I think the most interesting thing about this latest poll is that the Remainer Tory minority is proportionately smaller than the Brexit-supporting Labour minority.

There are more people like daodao than I would have expected!

Is it that surprising? We all knew at the time that loads of Labour's "heartlands" in the North and Wales had gone Leave - and, despite all the hype, they mostly stayed loyal to Labour in June, with only a few exceptions.

rottenborough said:

CarlottaVance said:

MikeSmithson said:

This is LAB's official policy on Brexit as agreed by conference

https://twitter.com/MikeGapes/status/889796005981544449

I'd love to see the legal advice they got on that.....'option.....should be retained'......how exactly?

Wasn't there advice from the guy who drafted A50 that it could be reversed during the process?

Precis; 'yes in theory, no in practice':

http://www.politico.eu/article/brexit-article-50-lord-kerr-john-kerr/

Recidivist said:

Actually this is going to affect me personally. I really need to be heard on this. Voting Labour is the only thing that will scare the government.

Why would voting Labour have scared the government more on Brexit specifically, than sending Lib Dem MPs to Parliament would've?

Danny565 said:

Recidivist said:

Actually this is going to affect me personally. I really need to be heard on this. Voting Labour is the only thing that will scare the government.

Why would voting Labour have scared the government more on Brexit specifically, than sending Lib Dem MPs to Parliament would've?

I guess that the Lib Dems might prop up the Tories, whereas Labour wouldn't?

On the subject of people changing their minds on Brexit...

Peter Hitchens is veering close to converting to Remain.

http://hitchensblog.mailonsunday.co.uk/2017/08/my-position-on-the-norway-option.html

"I have also concluded that government which *wants* to limit immigration( as our does not) could use the special provisions of the EEA to obtain it. Maybe I am kidding myself, but in any case, the consequences of an abrupt departure from the Single Market are so serious that they overcome all other arguments for me."

Danny565 said:

RoyalBlue said:

I think the most interesting thing about this latest poll is that the Remainer Tory minority is proportionately smaller than the Brexit-supporting Labour minority.

There are more people like daodao than I would have expected!

Is it that surprising? We all knew at the time that loads of Labour's "heartlands" in the North and Wales had gone Leave - and, despite all the hype, they mostly stayed loyal to Labour in June, with only a few exceptions.

Overall, about 35% of Labour supporters voted Leave, and a slightly higher proportion of Conservatives voted Remain. Since then, there's been movement of Labour Leavers to the Conservatives and vice versa.

AlastairMeeks said:

So it seems that the prospect of paying £36 billion isn't making for happy Brexit campers. I note that David Davis is being stuck with responsibility for floating this. Clearly his rivals are aiming for a Brexit betrayal narrative.

https://twitter.com/seanjonesqc/status/894318128204849155

King Cole, surely that's the case? The Daily Mail is very pro-Leave. The Mail on Sunday is very pro-Remain.

RoyalBlue said:

rkrkrk said:

On the subject of people changing their minds on Brexit...

Peter Hitchens is veering close to converting to Remain.

http://hitchensblog.mailonsunday.co.uk/2017/08/my-position-on-the-norway-option.html

"I have also concluded that government which *wants* to limit immigration( as our does not) could use the special provisions of the EEA to obtain it. Maybe I am kidding myself, but in any case, the consequences of an abrupt departure from the Single Market are so serious that they overcome all other arguments for me."

The Norway option is not Remain. Nice try

It's debatable whether it's an option. If everyone in the EU thought they could take the Norway option, you'd end up with chaos. The current EFTA/EEA arrangement only works because it's clear that its members are in the EU's sphere of influence and not vice versa.

AlastairMeeks said:

So it seems that the prospect of paying £36 billion isn't making for happy Brexit campers. I note that David Davis is being stuck with responsibility for floating this. Clearly his rivals are aiming for a Brexit betrayal narrative.

£36 billion sounds a decent price to me, but what can we do anyway? If you leave a club without checking the exit conditions first, you can't be too surprised to find yourself stuck with a bill.

RoyalBlue said:

rkrkrk said:

On the subject of people changing their minds on Brexit...

Peter Hitchens is veering close to converting to Remain.

http://hitchensblog.mailonsunday.co.uk/2017/08/my-position-on-the-norway-option.html

"I have also concluded that government which *wants* to limit immigration( as our does not) could use the special provisions of the EEA to obtain it. Maybe I am kidding myself, but in any case, the consequences of an abrupt departure from the Single Market are so serious that they overcome all other arguments for me."

The Norway option is not Remain. Nice try

Yes you're right - but my reading of what he is saying is... if the Norway option does not allow immigration control, then Mr Hitchens would prioritise remaining in the single market over leaving the EU.

That's a dramatic shift in position.

I think people take Brexit as policy position too literally; you can't do that. There is no single idea of Brexit, coherent or otherwise. Before the Ref many Brexiteers said we'd never leave the single market, now they want to leave everything in ways they don't even understand (Euratom, for example). Brexit is not policy, it is a totem.

Those who are more modern, cosmopolitan, internet savvy, pro feminist and LGBT etc. are Remainers. Those who are more traditional, culturally conservative, more concerned about sovereignty, more prone to isolationism and economic protectionism are Leavers. (there was a really good survey on this post-Ref but I can't find the link atm.) This explains why it wasn't simply a party vote during the Ref. But it also explains why Remainers can still vote with Corbyn's Labour: he is, for all the negatives thrown at him, the epitome of cosmopolitan life. Whereas the LDs (with Farron at the last election) were viewed with increased scepticism on those issues.

Corbyn is threading the needle between a not-too-hard-stance on Brexit (which is actually a good place to start negotiating from) to keep some Leavers happy (and because of his own economic plans, which are more in line with economic protectionism / populism) whilst being a social cosmopolitan that appeals to those who can't vote for "The Nasty Party" (Fox Hunting, Dementia Tax, Austerity, Oh My).

David Cameron did the same for the right; kept the base happy with right wing red meat, shrinking the government and (eventually) presenting the referendum, but passing things like equal marriage and not bringing up fox hunting to seem more cosmopolitan.

I don't think Remainers will leave Labour until / unless: a) LDs come across as more cosmopolitan post Farron b) Tories come across more cosmopolitan post May or c) Corbyn loses cosmopolitan credibility.

AlastairMeeks said:

On the polling, it's notable that Brexit positions are entrenched. This polling is strikingly immobile. No one is convincing anyone either way.

However, party positions are much less entrenched, as Leavers have moved to the Conservatives and Remainers have moved to Labour. You can see why a residue of socialist Leavers would stay with Labour. It's harder to see why a residue of Conservative Remainers would stay with the Tories while they're positioning themselves as the Brexit party except for football club loyalty reasons.

For that, among other reasons, I'm expecting the Conservatives to drift down slowly in the polls.

No one is convincing anyone either way.

Nor will they

so maybe we should all drop the Brexit crap for a month and enjoy whats left of the summer

rkrkrk said:

RoyalBlue said:

rkrkrk said:

On the subject of people changing their minds on Brexit...

Peter Hitchens is veering close to converting to Remain.

http://hitchensblog.mailonsunday.co.uk/2017/08/my-position-on-the-norway-option.html

"I have also concluded that government which *wants* to limit immigration( as our does not) could use the special provisions of the EEA to obtain it. Maybe I am kidding myself, but in any case, the consequences of an abrupt departure from the Single Market are so serious that they overcome all other arguments for me."

The Norway option is not Remain. Nice try

Yes you're right - but my reading of what he is saying is... if the Norway option does not allow immigration control, then Mr Hitchens would prioritise remaining in the single market over leaving the EU.

That's a dramatic shift in position.

The co-auther of the book Hitchens cites as underpinning his support for leaving the EU has just written this:

http://eureferendum.com/blogview.aspx?blogno=86563

Having not had a plan from the very start, the government is now faced with a task way beyond its capability. Had the people currently involved known what they were doing, and immediately set about executing the only effective plan available, we might have stood a chance. But they left it too late.

Peter_the_Punter said:

PeterC said:

MikeSmithson said:

This is LAB's official policy on Brexit as agreed by conference

https://twitter.com/MikeGapes/status/889796005981544449

Except this 'policy' collides with the brick wall of reality. Having activated A50 the UK will leave the EU regardless after March 2019. That is now a part of EU and UK law. This can only be stopped by legislation to revoke A50, subject to the unanimous agreement of the EU27. Without that the 'approval' of parliament of the 'final settlement' is neither here nor there. In any event there will be no 'final settlement', only a transitional deal, it seems. The 'final settlement' is the FTA which is to be negotiated in the years following 2019. By the time we have that we will have long left the EU anyway.

You interpret these matters with a certainty that suggests you have some expertise in them. Could you let me know what it is, as your interpretation runs counter to what I have heard from lawyers specialising in the subject.

On the whole, their view has been that nobody will really know until the matter is tested, and then it will probably depend on political will as much as anything. The Articles themselves, as I understand it, were drafted in a way that encourages staying in the club rather than leaving it.

On what basis would you contest that?

This gives the picture from the EU side

http://uk.businessinsider.com/eu-brexit-resolution-article-50-can-be-revoked-2017-3

But the ECJ is supreme in this matter and so it would have the right to make a final ruling.

From the Uk side I think it reasonable to assume that since the invoking of A50 required legislation then its revokation would likewise require legislation.

Mr. Pointer, no idea. But the Mail on Sunday has been doom-mongering about the referendum result for a long while.

148grss said:

I think people take Brexit as policy position too literally; you can't do that. There is no single idea of Brexit, coherent or otherwise. Before the Ref many Brexiteers said we'd never leave the single market, now they want to leave everything in ways they don't even understand (Euratom, for example). Brexit is not policy, it is a totem.

Those who are more modern, cosmopolitan, internet savvy, pro feminist and LGBT etc. are Remainers. Those who are more traditional, culturally conservative, more concerned about sovereignty, more prone to isolationism and economic protectionism are Leavers. (there was a really good survey on this post-Ref but I can't find the link atm.) This explains why it wasn't simply a party vote during the Ref. But it also explains why Remainers can still vote with Corbyn's Labour: he is, for all the negatives thrown at him, the epitome of cosmopolitan life. Whereas the LDs (with Farron at the last election) were viewed with increased scepticism on those issues.

Corbyn is threading the needle between a not-too-hard-stance on Brexit (which is actually a good place to start negotiating from) to keep some Leavers happy (and because of his own economic plans, which are more in line with economic protectionism / populism) whilst being a social cosmopolitan that appeals to those who can't vote for "The Nasty Party" (Fox Hunting, Dementia Tax, Austerity, Oh My).

David Cameron did the same for the right; kept the base happy with right wing red meat, shrinking the government and (eventually) presenting the referendum, but passing things like equal marriage and not bringing up fox hunting to seem more cosmopolitan.

I don't think Remainers will leave Labour until / unless: a) LDs come across as more cosmopolitan post Farron b) Tories come across more cosmopolitan post May or c) Corbyn loses cosmopolitan credibility.

That seems a fair analysis. It would go a long way towards explaining Canterbury and Kensington, for a start.

Welcome. May I inquire if there is any significance to your username? It seems a little unusual.

148grss said:

I think people take Brexit as policy position too literally; you can't do that. There is no single idea of Brexit, coherent or otherwise. Before the Ref many Brexiteers said we'd never leave the single market, now they want to leave everything in ways they don't even understand (Euratom, for example). Brexit is not policy, it is a totem.

Those who are more modern, cosmopolitan, internet savvy, pro feminist and LGBT etc. are Remainers. Those who are more traditional, culturally conservative, more concerned about sovereignty, more prone to isolationism and economic protectionism are Leavers. (there was a really good survey on this post-Ref but I can't find the link atm.) This explains why it wasn't simply a party vote during the Ref. But it also explains why Remainers can still vote with Corbyn's Labour: he is, for all the negatives thrown at him, the epitome of cosmopolitan life. Whereas the LDs (with Farron at the last election) were viewed with increased scepticism on those issues.

Corbyn is threading the needle between a not-too-hard-stance on Brexit (which is actually a good place to start negotiating from) to keep some Leavers happy (and because of his own economic plans, which are more in line with economic protectionism / populism) whilst being a social cosmopolitan that appeals to those who can't vote for "The Nasty Party" (Fox Hunting, Dementia Tax, Austerity, Oh My).

David Cameron did the same for the right; kept the base happy with right wing red meat, shrinking the government and (eventually) presenting the referendum, but passing things like equal marriage and not bringing up fox hunting to seem more cosmopolitan.

I don't think Remainers will leave Labour until / unless: a) LDs come across as more cosmopolitan post Farron b) Tories come across more cosmopolitan post May or c) Corbyn loses cosmopolitan credibility.

What a cracking first post! An interesting analysis.

GeoffM said:

AlastairMeeks said:

So it seems that the prospect of paying £36 billion isn't making for happy Brexit campers. I note that David Davis is being stuck with responsibility for floating this. Clearly his rivals are aiming for a Brexit betrayal narrative.

I'm very happy with it actually.

It's only the same as a one-time bribe to the Wehrmacht guard on the prison camp gate.
As soon as he trousers the cash we've escaped and we're off into the rolling hills of freedom.

what a stupid fucking analogy

Metatron said:

it is clear Theresa May will be willing to pay a Brexit divorce bill.There has to be a question whether all hardline Brexiteer Tory MPs will accept that.

No question.

JRM has already been lamenting on Sky

Metatron said:

Naïve article.If labour members were that concerned with Corbyns altitude to the EU they would not be hero-worshipping him at places like Glastonbury
On the other hand it is clear Theresa May will be willing to pay a Brexit divorce bill.There has to be a question whether all hardline Brexiteer Tory MPs will accept that.

Like Labour, although for different reasons, most Tories pride themselves on their moral superiority. In this particular case, that means they believe themselves to be people of integrity, reliability and a willingness to do the right thing rather than the necessary thing.

Therefore they would probably accept a moral duty on things like pensions and agreed current spending, because it would fit their image of themselves as 'sound' people to do business with. Especially as much of that money would be taking on liabilities rather than making upfront payments and if say £45 billion were agreed it's still at least a 25% reduction on what the EU were demanding.

And if it was put to them that they were showing how far superior they were to a lot of dodgy continentals, they would absolutely lap it up.

On the suggested exit bill: it depends whether that's directly linked to a trade deal or entirely unconditional.

If it's unconditional the EU will treat it as they did Blair's rebate for CAP reform approach.

Morris_Dancer said:

On the suggested exit bill: it depends whether that's directly linked to a trade deal or entirely unconditional.

If it's unconditional the EU will treat it as they did Blair's rebate for CAP reform approach.

This is where the British government has been strikingly inept. It should never have agreed to the EU's timetabling (which in any case is questionable in whether it is in accordance with Article 50). Talking about money before talking about other terms is a recipe for disaster.

JosiasJessop said:

rkrkrk said:

On the subject of people changing their minds on Brexit...

Peter Hitchens is veering close to converting to Remain.

http://hitchensblog.mailonsunday.co.uk/2017/08/my-position-on-the-norway-option.html

"I have also concluded that government which *wants* to limit immigration( as our does not) could use the special provisions of the EEA to obtain it. Maybe I am kidding myself, but in any case, the consequences of an abrupt departure from the Single Market are so serious that they overcome all other arguments for me."

Leaving aside the fact that columnists have to write stuff that will get people talking, not necessarily what they believe, I expect more previously strict-Brexit columnists and talking heads to stray towards (although not to) remain or soft-Brexit.

The reason? It's often easier to argue against something than for something. By arguing for Brexit pre-referendum, they were challenging the status quo. They will want to continue arguing against, rather than for. I therefore expect many talking heads to show slight reversals in their position, albeit rarely to remain.

Yes - it's a good point.

Peter Hitchens in particular I think rather enjoys playing a Cassandra role, and to me seems a bit put out when it appears that the government intends to do some of the things he suggests.

Mr. Meeks, this is an area May doesn't get enough blame. A plan should have been developed and then Article 50 triggered.

GeoffM said:

TOPPING said:

GeoffM said:

AlastairMeeks said:

So it seems that the prospect of paying £36 billion isn't making for happy Brexit campers. I note that David Davis is being stuck with responsibility for floating this. Clearly his rivals are aiming for a Brexit betrayal narrative.

I'm very happy with it actually.

It's only the same as a one-time bribe to the Wehrmacht guard on the prison camp gate.
As soon as he trousers the cash we've escaped and we're off into the rolling hills of freedom.

what a stupid fucking analogy

It achieved the desired result though.

One idiot bit.

stop digging.

Morris_Dancer said:

On the suggested exit bill: it depends whether that's directly linked to a trade deal or entirely unconditional.

If it's unconditional the EU will treat it as they did Blair's rebate for CAP reform approach.

What happened to 'nothing is agreed until everything is agreed' ?

NickPalmer said:

SquareRoot said:

Morning all. 6 weeks down the line ? 6 months down the line ... difficult to assess what may happen. I am in Berlin which must be the most graffiti ridden city in the world. Nothing is sacred bar guarded buildings. 're last thread lots of SPD posters about this area(andersonplatz) but little from Merkel supporters. I guess it's a left wing city like London?

Yes, Berlin is a bit more than 50% centre-left with the former Communist Linke pretty strong (20+% in both halves of the city):

http://www.wahlrecht.de/umfragen/landtage/berlin.htm

That said, I think Merkel is a shoo-in as Chancellor as suggested on a previous thread.

That’s an odd, but interesting polling result. Is it because for some sections of the population life was actually better under the DDR? I gather that in Russia it’s the old who tend to vote Communist as a sort of conservative ... ‘ah, times were better then’ vote.

Bit like Leavers here!

Tangentially related to policies and being out of line with reality, this article makes for fascinating if very depressing reading:

http://www.politics.co.uk/comment-analysis/2017/07/27/labour-talks-about-student-debt-butcrisis-debt-is-what-reall

For those who think impeachment of Trump inevitable, an account of how it took 50 years to nail Nixon on his sabotage of the Vietnam talks:
http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2017/08/06/nixon-vietnam-candidate-conspired-with-foreign-power-win-election-215461

OldKingCole said:

NickPalmer said:

SquareRoot said:

Morning all. 6 weeks down the line ? 6 months down the line ... difficult to assess what may happen. I am in Berlin which must be the most graffiti ridden city in the world. Nothing is sacred bar guarded buildings. 're last thread lots of SPD posters about this area(andersonplatz) but little from Merkel supporters. I guess it's a left wing city like London?

Yes, Berlin is a bit more than 50% centre-left with the former Communist Linke pretty strong (20+% in both halves of the city):

http://www.wahlrecht.de/umfragen/landtage/berlin.htm

That said, I think Merkel is a shoo-in as Chancellor as suggested on a previous thread.

That’s an odd, but interesting polling result. Is it because for some sections of the population life was actually better under the DDR? I gather that in Russia it’s the old who tend to vote Communist as a sort of conservative ... ‘ah, times were better then’ vote.

Bit like Leavers here!

Russian joke from the 1970s:

A young boy is telling his grandmother what life will be like when Communism is achieved.

'We will all have nice houses to live in, and schools and work, and eat meat three times a day.'

His grandmother sighed ecstatically.

'Just like it was under the Tsars!'

FeersumEnjineeya said:

What a cracking first post! An interesting analysis.

Agreed, welcome to cryptically-named 148grss!

NickPalmer said:

Recidivist said:

rkrkrk said:

Danny565 said:

Recidivist said:

Actually this is going to affect me personally. I really need to be heard on this. Voting Labour is the only thing that will scare the government.

Why would voting Labour have scared the government more on Brexit specifically, than sending Lib Dem MPs to Parliament would've?

I guess that the Lib Dems might prop up the Tories, whereas Labour wouldn't?

Yeah something like that. But a bit more like voting Lib Dem is threatening to call the police, voting Labour is actually dialling them.

That's a lovely metaphor!

In general I agree with the majority of posters that Corbyn neither wants nor needs to dig into any particular position on this at the moment - the sensible thing is to say the result needs to be good for Britain Cabinet should stop squabbling and get on with it, and whatever the Government is saying is not adequate. A crunch will come, but right now there are no political prizes for tying ourselves to any particular position. If Corbyn was passionately pro or anti, that would be a problem, but he really isn't. Nor are most Labour MPs - they are overwhelmingly *mildly* pro-EU.

I will take your word for it that Corbyn is neither pro- nor anti-EU (although that does beg the question of his referendum campaign).

As you know him better than people on here - how likely is it that he waters down his redistributive policies?

When the Cons were competently running the country, there was no merit in Lab positioning itself as a "me-too" centrist party. Now that the Cons have blown themselves up, I would have thought there would be great appetite for such a party of the type that perhaps the other three leadership candidates exemplified.

OldKingCole said:

NickPalmer said:

SquareRoot said:

Morning all. 6 weeks down the line ? 6 months down the line ... difficult to assess what may happen. I am in Berlin which must be the most graffiti ridden city in the world. Nothing is sacred bar guarded buildings. 're last thread lots of SPD posters about this area(andersonplatz) but little from Merkel supporters. I guess it's a left wing city like London?

Yes, Berlin is a bit more than 50% centre-left with the former Communist Linke pretty strong (20+% in both halves of the city):

http://www.wahlrecht.de/umfragen/landtage/berlin.htm

That said, I think Merkel is a shoo-in as Chancellor as suggested on a previous thread.

That’s an odd, but interesting polling result. Is it because for some sections of the population life was actually better under the DDR? I gather that in Russia it’s the old who tend to vote Communist as a sort of conservative ... ‘ah, times were better then’ vote.

Bit like Leavers here!

Berlin was always a "red" area following rapid industrialisation in the late C19. It annoyed the Kaisers and Hitler no end.