politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The Tory headache that no one talks about – the 3.2m GE2017 CO

CarlottaVance said:

Niall Fergusson - not a fan:

Angela Merkel has been a political disaster. The German chancellor has long been the darling of the pro-European media. In November 2015, The Economist called her “the indispensable European.” A month later, the Financial Times named her its “person of the year.” Time magazine proclaimed her “chancellor of the free world.”

These were extraordinary misjudgments. For the plaudits were raining down on a woman who had, just months before, made the single biggest error in the history of the postwar German republic.

https://www.bostonglobe.com/opinion/2018/02/26/angela-merkel-about-pay-for-all-her-blunders/gpuSOeFGvGt0Mf6SUDrDyM/story.html

"The important truth about which very few people agree with me is that Angela Merkel has been a political disaster."

Mr. Ferguson clearly doesn't read pb.com.
He would struggle to find many with a positive opinion of Merkel on here.

If Corbyn stood down/was removed as leader of the Labour Party, John Macdonnell and Seumas Milne would lose their jobs, and Labour would be in a very strong electoral position. It almost doesn't matter who they choose to replace Corbyn.

But which is the bigger stretch - a remainaic Con voter to switch to leftie Corbyn or a working class 'brexity' Lab voter to switch to a flag waving 'make britain great again' Tory party?

basicbridge said:

First feed-back from polling by the FT and the Mirror's is that Corbyn's pledge on a Customs Union is not going down well with Labour Leave voters.

That's what happens when you only listen to the metropolitan middle class who now run the Party.

So all these Labour Leavers are champions of free trade all of a sudden. I think people are just getting confused between a CU and the Single Market, and think that an implication of Corbyn's speech is that we can't keep Jonny Foreigner out.

kinabalu said:

But which is the bigger stretch - a remainaic Con voter to switch to leftie Corbyn or a working class 'brexity' Lab voter to switch to a flag waving 'make britain great again' Tory party?

They don't need to swap; a voter staying at home, or voting for the Lib Dems or a.n.other, is also useful to the opposition.

If Conservative remain voters stay at home, then the Conservatives are screwed. And the government isn't giving us any positive reasons to vote for them.

It's all BREXIT !!!!!

kinabalu said:

But which is the bigger stretch - a remainaic Con voter to switch to leftie Corbyn or a working class 'brexity' Lab voter to switch to a flag waving 'make britain great again' Tory party?

The shortest stretch is for those Cons to switch to the LibDems. The Labs flirted with the Kippers, and have now come back home.

Andrew said:

Seems rather as if the EU is willing to take significant economic damage, for ideological reasons.

Given what happened with Greece this probably shouldn't be surprising.

Seems rather as if the UK is willing to take significant economic damage, for ideological reasons.

SandyRentool said:

kinabalu said:

But which is the bigger stretch - a remainaic Con voter to switch to leftie Corbyn or a working class 'brexity' Lab voter to switch to a flag waving 'make britain great again' Tory party?

The shortest stretch is for those Cons to switch to the LibDems. The Labs flirted with the Kippers, and have now come back home.

Wasted vote.

If we were not to vote for the Cons it would need to count.

Nice to see that Corbyn still likes hanging out with racists

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/newsbeat-43211136

Bergdorf is a really unpleasant type - so will fit in well with the Corbyn's inner circle.

Andrew said:

Seems rather as if the EU is willing to take significant economic damage, for ideological reasons.

Given what happened with Greece this probably shouldn't be surprising.

I don't think the EU took significant economic damage for ideological reasons over Greece. Except possibly for allowing them into the Euro in the first place

Edit. I should also say, do you actually want the UK to be like Greece?

SandyRentool said:

basicbridge said:

First feed-back from polling by the FT and the Mirror's is that Corbyn's pledge on a Customs Union is not going down well with Labour Leave voters.

That's what happens when you only listen to the metropolitan middle class who now run the Party.

So all these Labour Leavers are champions of free trade all of a sudden. I think people are just getting confused between a CU and the Single Market, and think that an implication of Corbyn's speech is that we can't keep Jonny Foreigner out.

Evidence that people are getting confused about this?

Or are all Leave voters uneducated thickos?

MarqueeMark said:

basicbridge said:

First feed-back from polling by the FT and the Mirror's is that Corbyn's pledge on a Customs Union is not going down well with Labour Leave voters.

That's what happens when you only listen to the metropolitan middle class who now run the Party.

Labour ignoring Napoleon's basic rule of warfare: "Never interfere with your enemy when he is making a mistake."

There is polling out less than 24 hours after the speech?

basicbridge said:

First feed-back from polling by the FT and the Mirror's is that Corbyn's pledge on a Customs Union is not going down well with Labour Leave voters.

That's what happens when you only listen to the metropolitan middle class who now run the Party.

Perhaps, but - as with the thread header - there is no evidence this will shift anyone's voting intention.

Put yourself in the shoes of a stereotype "Labour Leaver" and ask if, at the next election, the difference between Corbyn's "customs union" and May's "customs arrangement" will swing your vote. I'd venture it's about as likely as the surface of the M25 melting in the heat this week, and that's before you replay the scenario with JRM as the Tory leader.

David_Evershed said:

SandyRentool said:

basicbridge said:

First feed-back from polling by the FT and the Mirror's is that Corbyn's pledge on a Customs Union is not going down well with Labour Leave voters.

That's what happens when you only listen to the metropolitan middle class who now run the Party.

So all these Labour Leavers are champions of free trade all of a sudden. I think people are just getting confused between a CU and the Single Market, and think that an implication of Corbyn's speech is that we can't keep Jonny Foreigner out.

Evidence that people are getting confused about this?

Or are all Leave voters uneducated thickos?

What a horrible slur. Many of them have been impeccably educated.

OldKingCole said:

FF43 said:

Theuniondivvie said:

Danny boy pessimistic.

https://twitter.com/DanielJHannan/status/968425628168007681

For once I agree with Hannan. No UK government will sign up to a customs union / SM against its will because it is forced to do so by a foreign institution. What this does is make the choice more binary. No Deal chaos or high levels of integration, at least in Ireland.

You seem to forget that we, the UK, and in particular the Conservative Party and in particular it’s naionalist wing, started all this. The vast majority was happy. Yes, some people were complaining about immigration but that was, IIRC, very, very recent and to a large extent encouraged by the malcontents. The EU wanted, and, as I read it still wants, us to stay and participate in developing the Union.

I think forcing the issue on the CU/SM in a treaty is dangerous, although I understand that the EU needs a legally watertight arrangement. Once you accept Brexit is costly, damaging and time-wasting but it is definitely going ahead you can look for outcomes that are somewhat less costly, damaging and time-wasting. Which means signing up to every EU programme going on a rule-taking basis. We should accept the CU and SM on their own relative* merits anyway. Ultimatums don't help.

* Obviously (to you and me at least) not as good as EU membership. About Liam Fox's views on staying in the CU:
https://twitter.com/SamuelMarcLowe/status/968389724430852098

rkrkrk said:

TOPPING said:

rkrkrk said:

FF43 said:

If Corbyn stood down/was removed as leader of the Labour Party, John Macdonnell and Seumas Milne would lose their jobs, and Labour would be in a very strong electoral position. It almost doesn't matter who they choose to replace Corbyn.

It does matter who they choose.

Someone like Chuka or maybe even Starmer would commit Labour to a second referendum - which I don't think would be popular.

And IMO Labour need to stick more or less with the policies in the last manifesto - which several leadership hopefuls would probably not do.

I think it would be possible and legitimate to say that the voters had delivered their verdict on the 2017 manifesto and that as a result parts of it would be changing.

Certainly it would be legitimate to change the manifesto.
I just think that the changes would risk losing votes. Corbyn went anti-austerity with some nationalisations which I think is actually popular, but I think other Labour leaders might water that down out of a misplaced sense that centrism is the only path to victory...

I suppose it depends on when a hard left Lab is deemed to have failed or whether, should it fail, it is deemed to be because they weren’t hard left enough.

The charge, however, that Cooper, Burnham, et al were just Tory-lite has been dented with the Cons’ move to the right.

F1: head-on, the Williams and Sauber looked damned similar. However, the Williams' rear wing is dark, which is (numbers aside) the most obvious distinguishing feature.

Also, the cold weather means less running today as well.

TOPPING said:

rkrkrk said:

TOPPING said:

rkrkrk said:

FF43 said:

If Corbyn stood down/was removed as leader of the Labour Party, John Macdonnell and Seumas Milne would lose their jobs, and Labour would be in a very strong electoral position. It almost doesn't matter who they choose to replace Corbyn.

It does matter who they choose.

Someone like Chuka or maybe even Starmer would commit Labour to a second referendum - which I don't think would be popular.

And IMO Labour need to stick more or less with the policies in the last manifesto - which several leadership hopefuls would probably not do.

I think it would be possible and legitimate to say that the voters had delivered their verdict on the 2017 manifesto and that as a result parts of it would be changing.

Certainly it would be legitimate to change the manifesto.
I just think that the changes would risk losing votes. Corbyn went anti-austerity with some nationalisations which I think is actually popular, but I think other Labour leaders might water that down out of a misplaced sense that centrism is the only path to victory...

I suppose it depends on when a hard left Lab is deemed to have failed or whether, should it fail, it is deemed to be because they weren’t hard left enough.

The charge, however, that Cooper, Burnham, et al were just Tory-lite has been dented with the Cons’ move to the right.

I wouldn't say that Cooper and Burnham lost to Corbyn because they were considered Tory-lite. It was more because they were devoid of ideas, passion and a vision for the party and the country.

FF43 said:

El_Capitano said:

PeterC said:

FF43 said:

Theuniondivvie said:

Danny boy pessimistic.

https://twitter.com/DanielJHannan/status/968425628168007681

For once I agree with Hannan. No UK government will sign up to a customs union / SM against its will because it is forced to do so by a foreign institution. What this does is make the choice more binary. No Deal chaos or high levels of integration, at least in Ireland.

I think you are right. It's all rather simple now: fully in or completely out.

I wonder if Corbyn is deliberately following a move from the Blair playbook: triangulation.

"Triangulation is the tactic of shifting party policy in to a broadly perceived 'centre-ground' in order to increase electability and outmanoeuvre the opposition, who subsequently become associated with extremism and anachronism."

The more that Labour moves towards a consensus soft-Brexit position, the more extreme the Conservatives look; and the more distance between his position and that of the ERG, the more the pressure that the latter will heap on May to implement a "hard Brexit".

What an irony if the anti-Blair ended up adopting a very Blairite approach to politics.

The art of statesmanship, as Talleyrand put it, is to foresee the inevitable and expedite it.

Corbyn makes a strange Talleyrand but it is the opposite approach from May who tries to delay the inevitable for as long as possible.

Delaying the inevitable is a sound conservative principle. If you expedite it too much you risk a counter-revolution from people who didn't accept that it really was inevitable.

CarlottaVance said:

David_Evershed said:

SandyRentool said:

basicbridge said:

First feed-back from polling by the FT and the Mirror's is that Corbyn's pledge on a Customs Union is not going down well with Labour Leave voters.

That's what happens when you only listen to the metropolitan middle class who now run the Party.

So all these Labour Leavers are champions of free trade all of a sudden. I think people are just getting confused between a CU and the Single Market, and think that an implication of Corbyn's speech is that we can't keep Jonny Foreigner out.

Evidence that people are getting confused about this?

Or are all Leave voters uneducated thickos?

Cafe worker Gillian Austin, 48, said: “Corbyn’s policy is to get with the Tory rebels so he can get the government out. It’s more a political move to oust Theresa May.

“I think less of him after this U-turn because he seems more to be saying what people want him to say. He’s determined to be the next Prime Minister.”

https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/jeremy-corbyns-brexit-plan-hasnt-12093689

One of Corbyn's key advantages, was that he claimed he wasn't like other politicians.

He has damaged that claim by his manoeuvring.

MarqueeMark said:

basicbridge said:

First feed-back from polling by the FT and the Mirror's is that Corbyn's pledge on a Customs Union is not going down well with Labour Leave voters.

That's what happens when you only listen to the metropolitan middle class who now run the Party.

Labour ignoring Napoleon's basic rule of warfare: "Never interfere with your enemy when he is making a mistake."

Clausewitz’s Principles of War

1. Objective - Direct every operation towards a clearly defined, decisive and attainable objective

2. Offensive - Seize retain and exploit the initiative

3. Economy of Force - Allocate minimum essential combat power to secondary efforts

4. Mass- Concentrate combat power at the decisive time and place

5. Surprise - Strike the enemy at a time, at a place or in a manner for which he is unprepared

6. Manoeuvre - Place the enemy in a position of disadvantage through the flexible use of combat power

7. Unity of Command - For every objective ensure unity of effort under one responsible leader

8. Security - Never permit the enemy to secure an unexpected advantage

9. Simplicity - Prepare clear uncomplicated plans and concise orders to ensure understanding

10. Policy - If you entrench yourself behind strong fortifications you compel the enemy to seek solutions elsewhere

DavidL said:

In 2017 the Tory vote went up to 42%. That included a large number of remain voters who had been loyal to DC. Other things, such as keeping Corbyn well away from power, were more important. Labour went into the 2017 election accepting that Brexit had to be delivered, even if it was unclear what kind of Brexit Corbyn wanted. Their vote went up even more sharply including many, many remainers. Other things, such as stopping the Tories getting a huge majority as threatened were simply more important. The Lib Dems went into the election arguing for a second referendum once the terms of the deal with the EU were finalised. Their share of the vote actually went down even although they won 4 more seats.

I find it bizarre that so many seem so convinced that Brexit will move votes. Other than with UKIP which collapsed (mission accomplished?) the evidence is quite compelling that it does not. By the next election it will be something that has happened. The options being so furiously debated (at least by the 2% that actually care) will no longer be open. The chances of it having any material impact on the next election are less than they were in 2017.

They polled 43.43% in Great Britain, excluding John Bercow's votes in Buckingham. (If you put Bercow's votes in the Conservative total they got 43.54%). Interestingly, Mrs Thatcher received 43.51% of the GB vote in 1983.

Interesting article from one of our best journalists:

"If the elite ever cared about the have-nots, that didn’t last long
John Harris"

https://amp.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/feb/26/have-nots-denigration-brexit-trump?CMP=share_btn_tw&__twitter_impression=true

@GaryLineker: Finally, something positive about Brexit. https://twitter.com/open_britain/status/968422910280036352

FF43 said:

Interesting list. I would say the EU has got most of those (not 5 so far). The UK not a single one of them.

I think the EU has got 5. Brexiteers were expecting a vote to Leave to trigger an offer of more goodies. They weren't expecting this.

David_Evershed said:

MarqueeMark said:

basicbridge said:

First feed-back from polling by the FT and the Mirror's is that Corbyn's pledge on a Customs Union is not going down well with Labour Leave voters.

That's what happens when you only listen to the metropolitan middle class who now run the Party.

Labour ignoring Napoleon's basic rule of warfare: "Never interfere with your enemy when he is making a mistake."

Clausewitz’s Principles of War

1. Objective - Direct every operation towards a clearly defined, decisive and attainable objective

2. Offensive - Seize retain and exploit the initiative

3. Economy of Force - Allocate minimum essential combat power to secondary efforts

4. Mass- Concentrate combat power at the decisive time and place

5. Surprise - Strike the enemy at a time, at a place or in a manner for which he is unprepared

6. Manoeuvre - Place the enemy in a position of disadvantage through the flexible use of combat power

7. Unity of Command - For every objective ensure unity of effort under one responsible leader

8. Security - Never permit the enemy to secure an unexpected advantage

9. Simplicity - Prepare clear uncomplicated plans and concise orders to ensure understanding

10. Policy - If you entrench yourself behind strong fortifications you compel the enemy to seek solutions elsewhere

I wonder if Trump is following these rules?

DavidL said:

AndyJS said:

DavidL said:

In 2017 the Tory vote went up to 42%. That included a large number of remain voters who had been loyal to DC. Other things, such as keeping Corbyn well away from power, were more important. Labour went into the 2017 election accepting that Brexit had to be delivered, even if it was unclear what kind of Brexit Corbyn wanted. Their vote went up even more sharply including many, many remainers. Other things, such as stopping the Tories getting a huge majority as threatened were simply more important. The Lib Dems went into the election arguing for a second referendum once the terms of the deal with the EU were finalised. Their share of the vote actually went down even although they won 4 more seats.

I find it bizarre that so many seem so convinced that Brexit will move votes. Other than with UKIP which collapsed (mission accomplished?) the evidence is quite compelling that it does not. By the next election it will be something that has happened. The options being so furiously debated (at least by the 2% that actually care) will no longer be open. The chances of it having any material impact on the next election are less than they were in 2017.

They polled 43.43% in Great Britain, excluding John Bercow's votes in Buckingham. (If you put Bercow's votes in the Conservative total they got 43.54%). Interestingly, Mrs Thatcher received 43.51% of the GB vote in 1983.

Interesting article from one of our best journalists:

"If the elite ever cared about the have-nots, that didn’t last long
John Harris"

https://amp.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/feb/26/have-nots-denigration-brexit-trump?CMP=share_btn_tw&__twitter_impression=true

The exact figures simply make my point even more strongly as does the fact that the UKIP voters by and large returned to their previous allegiances. The importance of Brexit both economically and politically is being vastly overblown by a media and political class who are obsessed. The vast majority are just bored to tears with it.

You don't think Brexit is unimportant. I wouldn't assume other people do.

https://twitter.com/petermannionmp/status/968454675912589313

The flaw is of course the assumption that Brexit is the main driving force behind how people vote -all the evidence from polls is that most people including remainers accept the referendum result, and just want to get on with it -and will continue to be a driving force after Brexit is over in 2022.

The flaw is continuing to label voters leavers and remainers, even after the referendum which decided the issue, and even when analysing how people will vote in local elections -as if people are more concerned to register a protest against something that has already been decided rather than the cost of council tax, and whether dustbins get emptied regularly.

The flaw is in assuming that people will vote to prevent an alleged economic catastrophe with regard to Brexit, by installing a definite economic catastrophe, Jeremy Corbyn as PM.

The flaw is in this imaginary remain voters who says to himself:

" Brexit is going to be an economic disaster for the UK. So in order to protest against it, I am going to vote for Jeremy Corbyn who will crash the economy completely.

And despite the continued Corbyn wankathon, that flaw will be exposed on general election night.

Scott_P said:

https://twitter.com/isabelhardman/status/968455170307887104

But unless she announces that the UK will no longer be seeking independent trade deals, then she won't be proposing a "customs union" in any meaningful sense.

SandyRentool said:

OK folks, please help me out here. The DUP want a frictionless border on the island of Ireland. Being in "a" Customs Union would facilitate this. The DUP are dead-set against a Customs Union, and insist that they will vote with the government against the CU amendment.

Does not compute?!?

There was free movement and a common travel area between Northern Ireland/the UK and the Irish free state/Republic but also customs controls from 1923 to 1992. Perhaps they think something that operated quite well for 70 years before the Internet could work again with modern technology - eu permitting.

My family made the ferry journey many times from Wales to Rosslare or Dublin in the 1970s and 1980s and my father had to open his car boot on a few occasions for inspection but no one ever asked for a passport or even ID. We coped fine!

Scott_P said:

https://twitter.com/isabelhardman/status/968455170307887104

Theresa May is awesome.

Though it does look like she is following where Corbyn leads.

And the big big mistake of Corbyn this week was to announce his fantasy customs union that allows the UK to make decisions on trade deals, BEFORE Theresa May's speech on Friday, instead of afterwards. It puts her at a distinct advantage.

But Corbyn never was very good at politics.

HYUFD said:

Key fact - of the top 10 Tory target seats they need to win at the next general election for an overall majority 8 voted Leave.

http://www.electionpolling.co.uk/battleground/targets/conservative

In 2022 Brexit will be over. Leave/Remain will be irrelevant.

TheScreamingEagles said:

Scott_P said:

https://twitter.com/isabelhardman/status/968455170307887104

Theresa May is awesome.

Though it does look like she is following where Corbyn leads.

Simultaneously shooting Labour's fox and her own.

FF43 said:

DavidL said:

FF43 said:

You don't think Brexit is unimportant. I wouldn't assume other people don't either.

As I have set out before I think that the economic importance of any deal with the EU is going to be infinitesimal and swamped by much more important aspects of economic policy both here and abroad. And I do not believe it is moving votes. But there are some technical aspects to it which are not without interest to nerds like me.

Indeed. You listed those aspects of economic policy. Brexit actively damages some of those aspects and is a distraction from dealing with the rest. You wouldn't consider switching to Remain. Nor should you. The point is, you prioritise Brexit over dealing with those aspects of economic policy.

Brexit needs to be carried out though. The sooner the better - then hopefully the Government can get back to bread and butter issues for the 2022 GE. We'll need to be in some sort of customs arrangement with the EU for the transition period as FTAs will take years to negotiate. So some sort of concession to the Soubry faction is probably sensible.
We'll see Friday but hopefully the Gov't will give a bit and Soubry can withdraw her amendment.

stevef said:

And the big big mistake of Corbyn this week was to announce his fantasy customs union that allows the UK to make decisions on trade deals, BEFORE Theresa May's speech on Friday, instead of afterwards. It puts her at a distinct advantage.

But Corbyn never was very good at politics.

Two words: Theresa May.

stevef said:

HYUFD said:

Key fact - of the top 10 Tory target seats they need to win at the next general election for an overall majority 8 voted Leave.

http://www.electionpolling.co.uk/battleground/targets/conservative

In 2022 Brexit will be over. Leave/Remain will be irrelevant.

Only if both main parties are committed to either staying out of the EU, the Customs Union and the Single Market and ending free movement or reversing Brexit or staying in the Single Market and Customs Union.

Corbyn's statement yesterday means that will not be the case

Pulpstar said:

FF43 said:

DavidL said:

FF43 said:

You don't think Brexit is unimportant. I wouldn't assume other people don't either.

As I have set out before I think that the economic importance of any deal with the EU is going to be infinitesimal and swamped by much more important aspects of economic policy both here and abroad. And I do not believe it is moving votes. But there are some technical aspects to it which are not without interest to nerds like me.

Indeed. You listed those aspects of economic policy. Brexit actively damages some of those aspects and is a distraction from dealing with the rest. You wouldn't consider switching to Remain. Nor should you. The point is, you prioritise Brexit over dealing with those aspects of economic policy.

Brexit needs to be carried out though. The sooner the better - then hopefully the Government can get back to bread and butter issues for the 2022 GE. We'll need to be in some sort of customs arrangement with the EU for the transition period as FTAs will take years to negotiate. So some sort of concession to the Soubry faction is probably sensible.
We'll see Friday but hopefully the Gov't will give a bit and Soubry can withdraw her amendment.

For that to work there needs to be an emphatic, rapid and permanent commitment to BINO. Otherwise we will be eating crisps, if we are lucky, or at least talking about it.

MikeSmithson said:

HYUFD said:

A comfortable majority of Tory 2017 voters voted Leave and a comfortable majority of Labour 2017 voters voted Remain neither party can therefore afford to lose its base.

Note too that Tory Remain voters were concentrated in safe seats in the Home Counties while Labour Leave voters were concentrated in marginal seats in the North and Midlands, so under FPTP it is Labpur who has more to lose by losing its Leave voters than the Tories do by losing their Remain voters.

Polling from Survation has also suggested a Remainer like Rudd or Hammond would get a lower Tory voteshare against Corbyn than a Leaver like Davis or Boris would if they succeeded May as Tory leader before the next general election

Have you got some more detail to back your seat distribution analysis particularly where it relates to marginals? Labour was supposed to lose lots of the seats you describe on June 8th. It lost 6 to the Tories but gained 28 and the gains included 11 in the midlands and the north. ,

Just 4 were in the Midlands. Warwick & Leamington was the only council area in the West Midlands that voted Remain, and High Peak is technically in the Midlands but has more in common with the North West or Yorkshire and the Humber. That leaves Derby North and Lincoln.

The Tories gained 4 seats from Labour in the Midlands, so it was a dead heat in terms of gains and losses for the two parties.

SandyRentool said:

Sunil_Prasannan said:

O/T

Thameslink's Finsbury Park to St Pancras rail link opened yesterday - and I did it, natch

Only a weekday "preview" service at the moment:

From Finsbury Park:
1059
1429
1511

From St Pancras:
1145
1306
1521

I am assuming it was a Class 700 unit. How did you find the much-criticised "ironing board" seats?

AIUI, the seating was specified by the DfT, not the franchisee. Therefore the apparently terrible seats are the responsibility of the public, not the private, sector. Bedford to Brighton will probably take a couple of hours, and the idea of having hard seats and no tables or armrests is appalling.

Yet another argument against renationalising the railways.

rkrkrk said:

TOPPING said:

rkrkrk said:

TOPPING said:

rkrkrk said:

FF43 said:

If Corbyn stood down/was removed as leader of the Labour Party, John Macdonnell and Seumas Milne would lose their jobs, and Labour would be in a very strong electoral position. It almost doesn't matter who they choose to replace Corbyn.

It does matter who they choose.

Someone like Chuka or maybe even Starmer would commit Labour to a second referendum - which I don't think would be popular.

And IMO Labour need to stick more or less with the policies in the last manifesto - which several leadership hopefuls would probably not do.

I think it would be possible and legitimate to say that the voters had delivered their verdict on the 2017 manifesto and that as a result parts of it would be changing.

Certainly it would be legitimate to change the manifesto.
I just think that the changes would risk losing votes. Corbyn went anti-austerity with some nationalisations which I think is actually popular, but I think other Labour leaders might water that down out of a misplaced sense that centrism is the only path to victory...

I suppose it depends on when a hard left Lab is deemed to have failed or whether, should it fail, it is deemed to be because they weren’t hard left enough.

The charge, however, that Cooper, Burnham, et al were just Tory-lite has been dented with the Cons’ move to the right.

Im not sure how helpful left and right are in analysing politics at the moment. The Cons have gone Brexiteer but otherwise are more interventionist that under Cameron.

I think the Labour manifesto was popular at the last election - and controbuted to Labour’s strong vote share. I can quite believe that JC himself put some people off. Someone like Thornberry could easily be a net positive I think, but other leaders I think would do worse if they changed the bits that worked.

I think many people wanted change, and as Brexit did not seem to be able to deliver it in the required timeframe (ie 24 hours), they went elsewhere, to Jezza's Lab. Was it the manifesto or was it the 'fuck you Tories/Establishment' mood music? JC definitely puts people off; Emily Thornberry or Keir would add likely hundreds of thousands if not those on-topic millions to Lab or at least away from the Cons.

HYUFD said:

stevef said:

HYUFD said:

Key fact - of the top 10 Tory target seats they need to win at the next general election for an overall majority 8 voted Leave.

http://www.electionpolling.co.uk/battleground/targets/conservative

In 2022 Brexit will be over. Leave/Remain will be irrelevant.

Only if both main parties are committed to either staying out of the EU, the Customs Union and the Single Market and ending free movement or reversing Brexit or staying in the Single Market and Customs Union.

Corbyn's statement yesterday means that will not be the case

Corbyn committed himself yesterday to staying out of the EU and the Single Market. The Customs Union he proposed -one which allowed the UK to make trade deals independently -would not be accepted by the EU, and if were, all Brexiteers would be fine with it.

Corbyn's speech yesterday changed very little, and most people will vote in 2022 on whether they think Corbyn will crash the economy.

DecrepitJohnL said:

stevef said:

And the big big mistake of Corbyn this week was to announce his fantasy customs union that allows the UK to make decisions on trade deals, BEFORE Theresa May's speech on Friday, instead of afterwards. It puts her at a distinct advantage.

But Corbyn never was very good at politics.

Two words: Theresa May.

And but then again she may not.........

David_Evershed said:

MarqueeMark said:

basicbridge said:

First feed-back from polling by the FT and the Mirror's is that Corbyn's pledge on a Customs Union is not going down well with Labour Leave voters.

That's what happens when you only listen to the metropolitan middle class who now run the Party.

Labour ignoring Napoleon's basic rule of warfare: "Never interfere with your enemy when he is making a mistake."

Clausewitz’s Principles of War

1. Objective - Direct every operation towards a clearly defined, decisive and attainable objective

2. Offensive - Seize retain and exploit the initiative

3. Economy of Force - Allocate minimum essential combat power to secondary efforts

4. Mass- Concentrate combat power at the decisive time and place

5. Surprise - Strike the enemy at a time, at a place or in a manner for which he is unprepared

6. Manoeuvre - Place the enemy in a position of disadvantage through the flexible use of combat power

7. Unity of Command - For every objective ensure unity of effort under one responsible leader

8. Security - Never permit the enemy to secure an unexpected advantage

9. Simplicity - Prepare clear uncomplicated plans and concise orders to ensure understanding

10. Policy - If you entrench yourself behind strong fortifications you compel the enemy to seek solutions elsewhere

HMF's three rules of warfare:

1. Don't mess with the soldiers' mail or food.

2. Don't march on Moscow.

3. Don't kick the volleyball.

DavidL said:

I find it bizarre that so many seem so convinced that Brexit will move votes. Other than with UKIP which collapsed (mission accomplished?) the evidence is quite compelling that it does not. By the next election it will be something that has happened. The options being so furiously debated (at least by the 2% that actually care) will no longer be open. The chances of it having any material impact on the next election are less than they were in 2017.

Any general election vote is both retrospective and prospective. I'm sure the manner of Brexit, and its [perceived] outcomes will still be moving votes in 2022, and both parties will still be coalitions of Leavers & Remainers.

But what really matters is that the Conservative Party offer an optimistic, plausible and fair* prospectus for the future. Relying on the Opposition being seen as unattractive or implausible isn't enough.

* NB Fairness isn't the same thing as equality.

stevef said:

And the big big mistake of Corbyn this week was to announce his fantasy customs union that allows the UK to make decisions on trade deals, BEFORE Theresa May's speech on Friday, instead of afterwards. It puts her at a distinct advantage.

But Corbyn never was very good at politics.

Talking of Corbyn's fantasy customs union, here is what the Conservative Party 2017 manifesto said: As we leave the European Union, we will no longer be members of the single market or customs union but we will seek a deep and special partnership including a comprehensive free trade and customs agreement.

TheScreamingEagles said:

Scott_P said:

https://twitter.com/isabelhardman/status/968455170307887104

Theresa May is awesome.

Though it does look like she is following where Corbyn leads.

Worth noting that in the article Hardman says she thinks the rumours probably aren't true

stevef said:

HYUFD said:

stevef said:

HYUFD said:

Key fact - of the top 10 Tory target seats they need to win at the next general election for an overall majority 8 voted Leave.

http://www.electionpolling.co.uk/battleground/targets/conservative

In 2022 Brexit will be over. Leave/Remain will be irrelevant.

Only if both main parties are committed to either staying out of the EU, the Customs Union and the Single Market and ending free movement or reversing Brexit or staying in the Single Market and Customs Union.

Corbyn's statement yesterday means that will not be the case

Corbyn committed himself yesterday to staying out of the EU and the Single Market. The Customs Union he proposed -one which allowed the UK to make trade deals independently -would not be accepted by the EU, and if were, all Brexiteers would be fine with it.

Corbyn's speech yesterday changed very little, and most people will vote in 2022 on whether they think Corbyn will crash the economy.

Most probably, though it confirms reversing course on the Customs Union is as far as Corbyn can go, reversing course on the Single Market and ending free movement would put his hold on Labour Leave voters at risk

SandyRentool said:

TOPPING said:

rkrkrk said:

TOPPING said:

rkrkrk said:

FF43 said:

If Corbyn stood down/was removed as leader of the Labour Party, John Macdonnell and Seumas Milne would lose their jobs, and Labour would be in a very strong electoral position. It almost doesn't matter who they choose to replace Corbyn.

It does matter who they choose.

Someone like Chuka or maybe even Starmer would commit Labour to a second referendum - which I don't think would be popular.

And IMO Labour need to stick more or less with the policies in the last manifesto - which several leadership hopefuls would probably not do.

I think it would be possible and legitimate to say that the voters had delivered their verdict on the 2017 manifesto and that as a result parts of it would be changing.

Certainly it would be legitimate to change the manifesto.
I just think that the changes would risk losing votes. Corbyn went anti-austerity with some nationalisations which I think is actually popular, but I think other Labour leaders might water that down out of a misplaced sense that centrism is the only path to victory...

I suppose it depends on when a hard left Lab is deemed to have failed or whether, should it fail, it is deemed to be because they weren’t hard left enough.

The charge, however, that Cooper, Burnham, et al were just Tory-lite has been dented with the Cons’ move to the right.

I wouldn't say that Cooper and Burnham lost to Corbyn because they were considered Tory-lite. It was more because they were devoid of ideas, passion and a vision for the party and the country.

Corbyn the only Anti Austerity Candidate

Although I mainly voted for him to annoy SteveF!!