politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » YouGov poll finds Corbyn beating Burnham

First! Ahead of HYUFD, crikey

https://twitter.com/GeneralBoles/status/623598950273155072

OMFG.

Well, Number Cruncher seems to be continuing his golden touch. Rapid reconsideration of positions required.

I'm slightly surprised that Yvette Cooper doesn't overtake Andy Burnham on second preferences when Liz Kendall is eliminated.

I dunno, it's hard to square this with how utterly sceptical the Corbyn camp was about the reports last week. Diane Abbott said she was expecting him to come 3rd.

Scott_P said:

@janemerrick23: 'Scuse me, Labour Party, hope you don't mind me saying this but er IF YOU VOTE FOR JEREMY CORBYN YOU WILL BE OUT OF POWER FOR 15 YEARS

Yep but I think there are a lot of Labour members who want some "thing" from their leader. Neither Burnham or Cooper offer that, Kendell offers something but is not the finished article, Corbyn definitely isn't a finished article but at least isn't Burnham and Cooper and I almost wonder if that is what this poll is saying....

I think after yesterday's debacle over welfare, that Corbyn (IF yougov is accurate) will win it on first preferences.

To be fair, Corbyn is the only Labour potential leader with a real vision for the party.

I mean it's a crazy, ruin-the-country, vision. But it is a vision.

How long do we expect Corbyn to last if he does win?

Moses_ said:

Corbyn and Watson?

I have just had a vision of Laurel and Hardy trying to get a piano to the top of a very long flight of steps.

Here you go:
www.youtube.com/watch?v=LJwuHJyxkp0

On Topic: 'Kin Hellfire!
So - a Lib Dem recovery becomes less of a loopy idea ...

FPT:

Casino_Royale said:

Andy_Cooke said:

But they are now, and it's those people - all of those who started after you and are already in their degree - or even have just finished this summer - who will pay more than they were promised.

It's very skilful politics from Osborne. No-one will listen to any Lib dem criticism, as they're fatally compromised already. The SNP won't raise it as it doesn't affect Scottish students. Labour are too disorganised to mount any challenge. The general public (and thus the media who follow what the public want) won't notice due to the persistence of looking at it as a conventional debt (which it is, of course, certainly not) and the headline numbers won't have changed.

Yet it makes it a far worse deal for students than the system brought in after the latest hike, and it changes the amount paid by the students.

See Martin Lewis at MoneySavingExpert: http://blog.moneysavingexpert.com/2015/01/09/a-deliberate-threat-to-the-government-u-turn-on-the-21000-student-loan-repayment-threshold-i-will-organise-mass-protest/

I see now you were making a point about this policy move by Osborne.

Sorry, I thought it was a serious suggestion of yours as a means of raising revenue for the exchequer from past students.

And your reaction was absolutely merited. It would be unfair and disgraceful to retrospectively change the conditions.
As it is for those affected by this. It's disgraceful, and definitely worse than the Lib Dems betrayal of students (albeit with less added sanctimony ). It's certainly ensured that my vote isn't going Tory-wards.

And, incidentally, surely creates a precedent to allow the government to actually implement that sort of suggestion.

notme said:

Come on, all we need now is Tony Blair to come out and warn the Labour party they shouldnt elect Corbyn as their leader. That's worth at least another 5%.

@GuidoFawkes: Tony is not helping. http://t.co/UmshzWZrMR

If Corbyn wins what position will be offered to Ms Abbott

Shadow home Sec?
Shadow chancellor?

Any betting markets up on this yet....? *bites down on knuckles *

eek said:

Scott_P said:

@janemerrick23: 'Scuse me, Labour Party, hope you don't mind me saying this but er IF YOU VOTE FOR JEREMY CORBYN YOU WILL BE OUT OF POWER FOR 15 YEARS

Yep but I think there are a lot of Labour members who want some "thing" from their leader. Neither Burnham or Cooper offer that, Kendell offers something but is not the finished article, Corbyn definitely isn't a finished article but at least isn't Burnham and Cooper and I almost wonder if that is what this poll is saying....

A fair point. A Corbyn leadership would not only kill off the left but also the remaining ex-ministers from the last Labour government.

HYUFD said:

Speedy said:

I think after yesterday's debacle over welfare, that Corbyn (IF yougov is accurate) will win it on first preferences.

Yougov did have Ed Miliband winning the members' vote on preferences in 2010, David Miliband actually won it. As indyref and the general election have also shown it has produced some sensational polls when the actual election has produced a more conservative result, I think Corbyn will now certainly win round 1, the question is if Burnham can beat him on preferences

If Corbyn wins more than 50% of first preferences, second preferences don't matter.
IF yougov is accurate then Corbyn was only 7% away from the finish line BEFORE the Welfare Bill mess yesterday in which Corbyn was the only benefactor.

Well, f*ck me. To be fair YG (last time out) got the Labour leadership poll wrong. But, with this poll I have a bad feeling Labour will really elect Corbyn. Oh dear, it's curtains. Labour members/activists really are deluded. There's no helping this bunch.

MarkHopkins said:

To be fair, Corbyn is the only Labour potential leader with a real vision for the party.

I mean it's a crazy, ruin-the-country, vision. But it is a vision.

Strange response to an election defeat... deciding that electoral appeal was just too damn broad.

Moses_ said:

If Corbyn wins what position will be offered to Ms Abbott

Shadow home Sec?
Shadow chancellor?

Any betting markets up on this yet....? *bites down on knuckles *

Shadow Home I think.

Scott_P said:

notme said:

Come on, all we need now is Tony Blair to come out and warn the Labour party they shouldnt elect Corbyn as their leader. That's worth at least another 5%.

@GuidoFawkes: Tony is not helping. http://t.co/UmshzWZrMR

Labour's approach to its leadership election is the party political approach of taking to the bottle after losing your job, and then stumbling, pissed, to your ex-employer to scream abuse at them from outside the office building.

After everyone's gone home.

Speedy said:

Moses_ said:

Corbyn and Watson?

I have just had a vision of Laurel and Hardy trying to get a piano to the top of a very long flight of steps.

Here you go:
www.youtube.com/watch?v=LJwuHJyxkp0

Super. A blast from the past. Present Labour just have to be the Keystone cops then.

Scott_P said:

@LadPolitics: Corbyn in to 2/1 second favourite to win Labour leadership. Amazing. http://t.co/GSVD8T9n3K

I can't wait to cash out some of my 250/1 bet now

Good profits no matter what from here on in.

When you see that pic of Dave and George laughing, who can be surprised. Corbyn will destroy Labour and as for Watson who has serious issues as to honesty (buying presents for Brown's kids) I am not sure which of them would be more damaging. On the whole I think it is Watson. With Corbyn, you know what you will get.... Watson.. FFS what on earth are Labour doing?????

Just stuck this tweet into the thread header

https://twitter.com/TSEofPB/status/623606024512122880

TheScreamingEagles said:

Casino_Royale said:

How long do we expect Corbyn to last if he does win?

2 weeks according to an article in tonight's Times.

Labour won't dispatch him that quickly. I'd give him 1-2 years.

If it were the Tory party, perhaps. But then IDS lasted 2 years too.

HYUFD said:

To get to 47% from 26% it looks like Burnham is winning virtually all Kendall's preferences but only half Cooper's preferences, the other half of Cooper's 20% goes to Corbyn to take him from 43% to 53%

I will repeat it:

IF yougov is accurate and after yesterdays Welfare Bill mess which Corbyn was the big winner and Burnham the big loser, then Corbyn would probably win the leadership on first preferences alone.
Second preferences would no longer be needed if a candidate gets more than 50% of first preferences and Corbyn was only 7% away before the Welfare Bill.

Life_ina_market_town said:

FPT @Andy_Cooke on student loans
You are conflating changes to existing rights and obligations which have prospective effect, with changes with true retrospective effect (see Wilson v First County Trust (No. 2) [2004] 1 AC 816, 876-879 (HL) per Lord Roger of Earlsferry). Since you have accepted that the new system of "student loans" is in reality a form of graduate taxation, I venture to quote the following:

No one has a vested right to continuance of the law as it stood in the past; in tax law it is imperative that legislation conform to changing social needs and governmental policy. A taxpayer may plan his financial affairs in reliance on the tax laws remaining the same; he takes the risk that the legislation may be changed (Gustavson Drilling (1964) Ltd v Minister of National Revenue [1977] 1 SCR 271, 282-283 per Dickson J).

Despite being effectively a form of graduate tax, it is not legally such or subject to tax law. It is valid on earnings made outside of this country and retained outside of this country, it is capped at a certain level and it is time-limited.

Whilst tax laws can be made in future to reference all of this, precedent from tax law is, at this time, not valid.

It would be as if stamp duty was changed and made retrospective to all transactions made since 2012. Or if a change to income tax levels was then made retrospective to all incomes since, say, 2010.

In another sense, the precedent cited is irrelevant as, due to Constitutional Convention, no Parliament may bind its successor and all legislation may change. Accordingly, the final sentence may accurately be changed to reflect law outside of tax legislation as: "A citizen may plan his affairs in reliance on the laws remaining the same; he takes the risk that the legislation may be changed", which is completely accurate and completely unhelpful (and thus would fairly belong in a computer help manual).

The system is advertised as having certain costs to the graduate. The Government have not chosen to publish it as a taxation system (incorrectly, in my view) but as a loan. Accordingly, if those costs to the graduate change after they have accepted the deal and after they can change their minds, they are unfair. In short, the terms and conditions of a loan (for as such it is publicised, and as such it is accepted) have changed by the unilateral decision of the lender (who has decided that the borrower should start repaying from a lower level) and without any recompense of action by the borrower, and in a scenario where the borrower was previously assured by an entity who could not be overruled that such would not happen.

The_Apocalypse said:

Blair is toxic, I wish he'd stay out of. May as well tune out of politics for the foreseeable future, if Labour are going to make themselves a laughing stock. We'll literally have no effective opposition.

Indeed, Without him Labour could have remained pure and untainted by governing.

RobD said:

@TSE - I see my plane journeys are still working wonders for the Tory party

or plane speaking

Mortimer said:

The_Apocalypse said:

Blair is toxic, I wish he'd stay out of. May as well tune out of politics for the foreseeable future, if Labour are going to make themselves a laughing stock. We'll literally have no effective opposition.

Indeed, Without him Labour could have remained pure and untainted by governing.

*rolleyes*

I mean toxic in relation to leadership election. Then again, Blair post 2003 isn't a liked leader in the country as whole in general. Not that you'd know, the way *some* Tories talking about him....

I've got a horrible feeling Jezza might just do this. Burnham is finished - the knives are out at CiF after his unabstention. Amazing to think that Corbyn, who was on Labour's lunatic fringes even in Kinnock's day, could soon be leading the party.

The_Apocalypse said:

SouthamObserver said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

SouthamObserver said:

Looks like Dan Jarvis will be leading Labour into the 2020 election if this poll is right.

I think would be a good bet, at least a bet on not Corbyn leading Labour in 2020 (in Corbyn does win).

There is no chance at all he will last until 2020. It will be a blast while he is in charge though. I'd give him a year tops. Maybe Tyson is right - Labour needs to make Corbyn leader before it comes to its senses.

I can't believe Labour actually needs to experiment with a Corbyn leadership to come to its senses. Is everyone voting completely stupid, or something? Ralph Miliband was right, Labour will always let down the working classes in the end.

Labour is all there is. Either it comes to its senses or something emerges to replace it. The more I think about it the more a Corbyn leadership is the catalyst for a major and necessary shake-up.

Tim_B said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Just stuck this tweet into the thread header

https://twitter.com/TSEofPB/status/623606024512122880

what on earth does "in touch with the concerns of ordinary people" mean?

Looking and sounding like a typical next door neighbour in a middle class neighbourhood.
Corbyn is much closer to that than the other 3 who look and sound robotic, if they speak at all.

I stick by my position from the previous night: Corbyn as LOTO might prove more of a handful for the Conservatives than anyone expects.

TheScreamingEagles said:

Casino_Royale said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Casino_Royale said:

How long do we expect Corbyn to last if he does win?

2 weeks according to an article in tonight's Times.

Labour won't dispatch him that quickly. I'd give him 1-2 years.

If it were the Tory party, perhaps. But then IDS lasted 2 years too.

The Times say they will get rid of him by conference, is the only time they can do so.

Too ruthless for Labour. They will have to give him a chance if he does win.

Besides which he might actually be popular with the party in the first few months.

Jonathan said:

Wondering if it's possible to imagine a worse set of circumstances for Labour.

Corbyn appoints Ed Miliband Shadow Chancellor?

Plato said:

The revolt by his supporters would be enormous - I can't see him being visited by grey men in suits.

How can he stand down if he does win? Sudden ill health? It still leaves a massive shadow over the whole Party that they collectively chose him.

Casino_Royale said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Casino_Royale said:

TheScreamingEagles said:

Casino_Royale said:

How long do we expect Corbyn to last if he does win?

2 weeks according to an article in tonight's Times.

Labour won't dispatch him that quickly. I'd give him 1-2 years.

If it were the Tory party, perhaps. But then IDS lasted 2 years too.

The Times say they will get rid of him by conference, is the only time they can do so.

Too ruthless for Labour. They will have to give him a chance if he does win.

Besides which he might actually be popular with the party in the first few months.

He could say he wants to spend more time with David Blunkett's family....

Jonathan said:

Wondering if it's possible to imagine a worse set of circumstances for Labour.

What is that saying about having to hit rock bottom before you can start to recover?

By the way, the bet on tonight's polling is Tom Watson @ 8/13 with Betfair Sportsbook.

TheScreamingEagles said:

Just stuck this tweet into the thread header

https://twitter.com/TSEofPB/status/623606024512122880

Still... That means at least half the non-Corbyn voters also don't prioritise election winning. Perhaps the wording of the question.

To be fair, if you were trying to avoid another Iraq war, you might praise that kind of conscientiousness over repeating-Blair-and-winning among Labour members, but it's very self-sacrificial of them.