politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Nearly of third of current LAB voters not sure that Corbyn wou
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Nearly of third of current LAB voters not sure that Corbyn would make the best PM
How solid is Labour's vote? Nearly a third of their 2017 voters are not sure Jeremy Corbyn would make the best Prime Minister. #Lab17 pic.twitter.com/XiQaQCmQyf
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
I'm not convinced Corbyn will ever be PM. If he lasts to the next election I could easily see a 1992 scenario playing out.
There is a whiff of hubris about the left.
Edited extra bit: just seen the Aston Martin rumours, but they were circulating last race weekend too. F1 needs to get more teams in. If it lost two there'd be a paltry 16 cars on the grid.
Indeed now I think about it- you could say these things take turns.
Labour overconfident in 2015, Tories underconfident.
Tories probably overconfident in 2010.
Were Labour overconfident in 2005? Not sure I remember really...
We hear a great deal from Labour people who are not enamoured of JC.
However that so many Tory voters cant decide between May and Corbyn suggests that both parties vote may be soft.
And, yes, in 1997, after 18 years of Thatcherism, when whole industries and communities across our country had been destroyed by the Tories and our public services were on their knees, it was the Blair/Brown government that recognised and delivered the scale of public investment that a 21st century society needed.
and
The scandal of the Private Finance Initiative, launched by John Major, has resulted in huge, long-term costs for tax payers, whilst handing out enormous profits for some companies. Profits which are coming out of the budgets of our public services.
Over the next few decades, nearly two hundred billion is scheduled to be paid out of public sector budgets in PFI deals. In the NHS alone, £831m in pre-tax profits have been made over the past six years. As early as 2002 this conference regretted the use of PFI.
As McDonnell has made clear, how they balance the books is by stealing assets from their owners. The post Grenfell Tower "let's grab all the empty houses in Kensington" threat was only the tip of a very large iceberg.
Will the young cultists have their eyes slightly opened by Khan's union driven assault on their Uber service?
But what makes me laugh are the Labourites who were against Corbyn before the election due to his policies and past words and deeds, who now support him just because they think he might win ...
But I think the forthcoming conference is as important as I can recall. The Tories desperately require new leadership and new ideas that resonate with the concerns of the British people. Housing, transport, job security, even social care need radical new thinking and leadership. If the Conference is all about Brexit the Tories will be in serious trouble.
https://order-order.com/2017/09/25/labour-fringe-expel-jewish-activists-israel-like-nazis/
A fringe event at Labour conference has heard calls to expel Jewish activists from the party, while a speaker compared Israel to Nazis and the audience was banned from tweeting in an attempt to silence “hostile” coverage.
https://joesaward.wordpress.com/2017/09/25/red-bull-and-aston-martin/
The Tories need some new faces as urgently as Labour do.
Under Blair/Brown/Campbell (to 2003), the Tory vote was decimated four times over (14.1m down to 8.8m), those 6 million did not go to Labour over the same period.
Fine. Except it becomes clearer all the time that on Brexit Labour is as divided as the Tories...
Of course, those ex-lab voters came back to bite the party in 2015.
Bigly.
Have the tories made a similar mistake using their time in power to stamp on the faces of the young?
I think almost certainly.
https://youtu.be/ai4OnlSI36A?t=433
Britain Elects
@britainelects
Following
More
Westminster voting intention:
LAB: 42% (-)
CON: 40% (-2)
LDEM: 8% (+1)
UKIP: 4% (-)
GRN: 2% (-1)
via @ICMResearch, 22 - 24 Sep
The key point now is that the money has already been wasted. Bringing PFI contracts back in-house can only be done in one of two ways. Either the government pays full market value for them, in which case there is zero advantage for the taxpayer, or you renege on the contract and confiscate some or all of the value of the contracts, in which case you damage the UK's credit worthiness. Presumably McDonnell intends the latter.
"A Fox news anchor linked directly to my Twitter feed, directly to my website, and, to date, has refused to apologise for it," he said."
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-41384829
Obviously we did not often see eye-to-eye politically, but one of the chief assets of this site is that the presence of well-informed authority on all sides means that no-one gets away with empty bluster in support of their own preferences. And Mark exemplified that authority best of all. RIP.
Con - they would win anyway, by a long way.
Lab - Con win anyway, by a long way.
LD - Con win anyway, by a long way.
...etc.
I suppose you could vote in such a way as to maximise one of the losing party's chances of retaining their deposit.
With inflation at 3.9% (Current RPI), I make it 2.4 times the original value.
So for every million Brown "invested", Corbyn might have to pay 2.4 million to "uninvest" it all !
There would be a good case to be made for personally surcharging the negotiators on the government side for some of the late '90s PFI contracts, which were so rediculously one sided as to amount to malfeasance in public office.
Presumably I now come across as a seventysomething
Of course it hasn't always worked like that, but I think you'll find that nearly all the disaster stories date from the Blair/Brown years.
Hammond is a good tactician and underestimated.
The latter costs will still have to be paid for by Government, presumably through new staff if it say NHS or school.
Many of the audience cheer thinking he said Labour has Momentum on its side.
https://twitter.com/JohnRentoul/status/912323960548855808
FWIW, I do think that given the scale of the profits handed these companies, there is a moral argument for sub-market compulsory purchase at the end of the term - but whether that can be squared with a legal case, or whether a fair formula can be developed are different questions.
David Steel, Liberal Party
I wonder if TFL's decision will affect Uber in Watford?
The income source on the other hand is incredibly safe (The UK always pays its' debts).
So the effective yield ought to have been slightly above gilt yield low.
I wonder what inflation clauses are in these contracts - will the gov't or contractor effectively pay for inflation ?
2. Over time, seats that were once safe can become marginals and then switch.
3. There've been more than enough elections of the last 20 (and a bit) years where supposedly safe seats fell to prove that parties that work them can get their reward when the circumstances are right.
By 2022, it will be 12 years since the last Labour government; it will be 33 years since the Berlin Wall fell; it will be 37 years since the Miners' Strike; it will be 43 years since the winter of discontent. For a lot of people - not just the young - it's all ancient history.
Debbie Abrahams, the shadow work and pensions secretary, has just finished her speech to the conference. She said Labour would allow the women affected by the accelerated increase in the state pension age (the so-called Waspi women - women against state pension injustice) to retire early.
...
"As a starter, I can announce today that a Labour government in power now would allow these women to retire up to two years early."
What she omitted to point out to delegates is that the WASPIs' pensions would be reduced by 6% for each year that they bring their retirements forward. Somehow I don't think that's quite what the 'WASPIs' had in mind.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/blog/live/2017/sep/25/labour-conference-2017-sadiq-khan-says-uk-should-stay-in-single-market-for-good-politics-live
15:47
Learning things is overreacted anyway; I've not learned anything since 2003 and I'm doing fine.
Let's say your Tory MP has a 15K majority over Labour if you (and others) vote Labour.
I would have thought that your personal objectives would be better served by Tory having a 20K majority over Kabpur but there being 5K Green or LD or Natural Law votes depending on which minority issue is your personal priority?
That way your MP knows that lots of people really care about ecology or Europe or yogic flying or whatever. Seems a cleaner signalling device to me
"Fear of what a hard-left party could do in government quite simply isn't believed by far too many, and a lot more accept the simplistic solutions at face value."
For some of the younger ones, it's ... "This Marxist idea sounds very nice, It's a pity no ones tried it before, so why not us?"
For the older ones ... well, some believe that Kim Jong Un is a nice guy and Stalin got a bad press.
Whether there's enough real fruitcakes around, that's anyone's guess.
http://edition.cnn.com/2017/09/25/europe/german-election-result-afd-walkout/index.html
What's going on here?
Renegotiate or never expect a to win another government contract again
Brown abused PFI. I give Blair the credit of not understanding what Brown was doing. Major was broadly ok.
Meanwhile:
https://twitter.com/BBCBreaking/status/912332035347410945
Bet it is not used again