politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » New YouGov polling for the New Statesman shows the huge bet

Well should keep us off pigs for about 2 minutes.

For *any* party, the views of the party members are going to be more extreme than the views of the people who are considering voting for that party but not currently doing so. Isn't that a necessity?

So the question is... how do these figures compare with Osborne supporters and Tory weak voters, or Farron supporters and LDem potentials?

FPT:

SandyRentool said:

Slackbladder said:

Dan Hodges ‏@DPJHodges 3 mins3 minutes ago

If mandatory reselection goes through it will send signal even Tom Watson can't mitigate Corbynite excesses, and that will be a big deal...

I am sure that loyal, hard-working MPs will see this as nothing more than a rubber stamping exercise.

The idea from some of these Labour MPs that they have a divine right to remain an MP forevermore without any accountability to activists is baffling.

I didn't even vote for Corbyn, but I would want my MP to be deselected if he started routinely voting with the Tories on things like Syria, welfare, etc.

bondegezou said:

For *any* party, the views of the party members are going to be more extreme than the views of the people who are considering voting for that party but not currently doing so. Isn't that a necessity?

So the question is... how do these figures compare with Osborne supporters and Tory weak voters, or Farron supporters and LDem potentials?

Most likely, Corbyn voting pbtories are the exception that proves the rule I think.

Apologies for going off-topic straight away, but I do need to respond to Hurst Llama.

"Sean_F said:

Following on from my last post, quite a lot of seats have moved Leftwards since 1992. The Conservatives have lost 10 seats in Scotland. Edmonton, Ilford North and South, Enfield North, Croydon North, Mitcham & Morden, Ealing Acton, Brentford & Isleworth, Hayes & Harlington, Harrow West, Brent North, Westminster North, Eltham, Chorley, Lancashire West, Leeds NE and NW, Sheffield Hallam, Bristol West, Chester, Bury South, Bolton NE, Birmingham Edgbaston, Hall Green, Yardley, Brighton Pavilion, Hove, Lancaster & Fleetwood, Dewsbury, Luton North & South, Slough, Southampton Test, Gedling, Exeter, Tynemouth, Wirral South, Wirral West, Blackpool South, Southport, Crosby, Middlesborough South, Wolverhampton SW have all gone, some beyond recovery. That's 53 seats.

In addition, seats like Croydon Central, Brighton Kemptown, Enfield Southgate, Harrow East, Chipping Barnet, Hendon, Finchley & Golders Green are much more marginal than they used to be.

So, how are the Conservatives only down 5 seats on 1992? They've won a handful that were held by the Lib Dems and Labour, but mostly their gains are driven by population increase in Conservative-voting areas creating new constituencies, while population falls (or stagnation) are cutting the numbers of seats in left-wing areas."

Hurst Llama replied:-

"Is that the same as saying that seats are changing hands because of population movements rather than existing populations changing their minds about who they prefer? If so you need to be careful about about posting stuff like that on here because it comes close to saying *looks around to see who is listening and then whispers*, "white flight"

That's a factor. But there are others. A very big increase in the student/university worker population in some seats; continued drift leftwards in Scotland, Merseyside, and the urban North. Continued leftward drift among middle class voters in Greater London and core cities.

On the plus side for the Conservatives, rapid economic growth in prosperous areas fuels growth in their electorates, and in due course, growth in the number of constituencies. There is an ongoing shift of population into Conservative-voting districts from Labour-voting districts. Presumably, those who move are disproportionately right wing.

adamandcat said:

How lol too interrupt the Farron thread so early!

There was a Farron thread? Why, did he do something?

DaemonBarber said:

Danny565 said:

FPT:

SandyRentool said:

Slackbladder said:

Dan Hodges ‏@DPJHodges 3 mins3 minutes ago

If mandatory reselection goes through it will send signal even Tom Watson can't mitigate Corbynite excesses, and that will be a big deal...

I am sure that loyal, hard-working MPs will see this as nothing more than a rubber stamping exercise.

The idea from some of these Labour MPs that they have a divine right to remain an MP forevermore without any accountability to activists is baffling.

I didn't even vote for Corbyn, but I would want my MP to be deselected if he started routinely voting with the Tories on things like Syria, welfare, etc.

Is mandatory reselection back on the cards now? Thought it had been ruled out...

A u-turn? Andy Burnham's influence knows no bounds

Labour now has an activist base and a leader that is totally at odds with the majority of its MPs and voters. Something has got to give.

RobD said:

DaemonBarber said:

Danny565 said:

FPT:

SandyRentool said:

Slackbladder said:

Dan Hodges ‏@DPJHodges 3 mins3 minutes ago

If mandatory reselection goes through it will send signal even Tom Watson can't mitigate Corbynite excesses, and that will be a big deal...

I am sure that loyal, hard-working MPs will see this as nothing more than a rubber stamping exercise.

The idea from some of these Labour MPs that they have a divine right to remain an MP forevermore without any accountability to activists is baffling.

I didn't even vote for Corbyn, but I would want my MP to be deselected if he started routinely voting with the Tories on things like Syria, welfare, etc.

Is mandatory reselection back on the cards now? Thought it had been ruled out...

A u-turn? Andy Burnham's influence knows no bounds

Possibly, but all I can find is stuff saying it had been ruled out (can't find anything after the leadership election)
Gladly be put right if somebody can post a link.

DaemonBarber said:

RobD said:

DaemonBarber said:

Danny565 said:

FPT:

SandyRentool said:

Slackbladder said:

Dan Hodges ‏@DPJHodges 3 mins3 minutes ago

If mandatory reselection goes through it will send signal even Tom Watson can't mitigate Corbynite excesses, and that will be a big deal...

I am sure that loyal, hard-working MPs will see this as nothing more than a rubber stamping exercise.

The idea from some of these Labour MPs that they have a divine right to remain an MP forevermore without any accountability to activists is baffling.

I didn't even vote for Corbyn, but I would want my MP to be deselected if he started routinely voting with the Tories on things like Syria, welfare, etc.

Is mandatory reselection back on the cards now? Thought it had been ruled out...

A u-turn? Andy Burnham's influence knows no bounds

Possibly, but all I can find is stuff saying it had been ruled out (can't find anything after the leadership election)
Gladly be put right if somebody can post a link.

On Guido's blog (bear with me here), there is a quite saying he'll accept it if the membership vote for it.

JosiasJessop said:

DaemonBarber said:

Danny565 said:

FPT:

SandyRentool said:

Slackbladder said:

Dan Hodges ‏@DPJHodges 3 mins3 minutes ago

If mandatory reselection goes through it will send signal even Tom Watson can't mitigate Corbynite excesses, and that will be a big deal...

I am sure that loyal, hard-working MPs will see this as nothing more than a rubber stamping exercise.

The idea from some of these Labour MPs that they have a divine right to remain an MP forevermore without any accountability to activists is baffling.

I didn't even vote for Corbyn, but I would want my MP to be deselected if he started routinely voting with the Tories on things like Syria, welfare, etc.

Is mandatory reselection back on the cards now? Thought it had been ruled out...

It looks as though Corbyn's doing a will-of-the-people act. He's personally against the move (of course, and you'd gave to be a baby-eating Tory to suggest otherwise), but if it's agreed at conference he'll stand by that decision and it'll become party policy.

Which is a very odd form of leadership. I wonder if he'll even go on stage and argue against it?

On Trident, he seems to be hoping to be sent naked out of the conference chamber.

JosiasJessop said:

It looks as though Corbyn's doing a will-of-the-people act. He's personally against the move (of course, and you'd gave to be a baby-eating Tory to suggest otherwise), but if it's agreed at conference he'll stand by that decision and it'll become party policy.

Which is a very odd form of leadership. I wonder if he'll even go on stage and argue against it?

RobD said:

On Guido's blog (bear with me here), there is a quite saying he'll accept it if the membership vote for it.

Thanks!

Just backed Scotland to win the world cup at 130-1...

Pulpstar said:

Just backed Scotland to win the world cup at 130-1...

arf

Richard_Nabavi said:

The George Osborne question is a real killer. Forget the Corbynista response (you'd expect them to favour their man), but look at the current and potential Labour voters. Substantially less than half of the sample think Corbyn would make a better PM than Osborne.

What does that tell us ?

It says a Lada is not as preferable as a Volkswagen Diesel.

SandyRentool said:

Plato_Says said:

You'd like less choice where you shop?

SandyRentool said:

I don't agree with "tax everyone else more". I would agree with "tax those with high earnings and/or high wealth and companies making high profits more". Otherwise, I'm a full-on Jezlamist.

Ten types of overpriced tat is still overpriced tat. An energy cartel isn't competition. Five different vans all delivering parcels to the same business park isn't efficient.

Scary - you actually believe that?

Scott_P said:

@OliverCooper: Corbyn says Labour MPs will be forced to compete for reselection if Conference approves it. Countdown to the #purge. http://t.co/Yn1qTjdidZ

Mandatory reselection is merely democracy in action. It should be the standard situation in all political parties. That it is not present in either the Labour or Tory parties is a disgrace.

SandyRentool said:

Plato_Says said:

You'd like less choice where you shop?

SandyRentool said:

I don't agree with "tax everyone else more". I would agree with "tax those with high earnings and/or high wealth and companies making high profits more". Otherwise, I'm a full-on Jezlamist.

Ten types of overpriced tat is still overpriced tat. An energy cartel isn't competition. Five different vans all delivering parcels to the same business park isn't efficient.

Employs five times as many people though.

Dair said:

Scott_P said:

@OliverCooper: Corbyn says Labour MPs will be forced to compete for reselection if Conference approves it. Countdown to the #purge. http://t.co/Yn1qTjdidZ

Mandatory reselection is merely democracy in action. It should be the standard situation in all political parties. That it is not present in either the Labour or Tory parties is a disgrace.

it's a farce is what it is.

MarkHopkins said:

SandyRentool said:

Plato_Says said:

You'd like less choice where you shop?

SandyRentool said:

I don't agree with "tax everyone else more". I would agree with "tax those with high earnings and/or high wealth and companies making high profits more". Otherwise, I'm a full-on Jezlamist.

Ten types of overpriced tat is still overpriced tat. An energy cartel isn't competition. Five different vans all delivering parcels to the same business park isn't efficient.

Scary - you actually believe that?

So you think it IS efficient to have five different vans all delivering parcels to the same place, and that a cartel provides competition? I agree that 'tat' is a subjective description.

We need to 'raise awareness' of Premier League football in China apparently...

https://twitter.com/tommctague/status/646708496138924032

Richard_Nabavi said:

The George Osborne question is a real killer. Forget the Corbynista response (you'd expect them to favour their man), but look at the current and potential Labour voters. Substantially less than half of the sample think Corbyn would make a better PM than Osborne.

You realise that "Don't Knows" are not included, right?

Just the other day, favourability ratings of the whole public put Corbyn and Osborne neck-and-neck.

blackburn63 said:

Being a Corbynite is fine as long as you accept that with him as leader Labour can't win a general election, not enough people share his views.

The problem was, we wouldn't win an election with any of the other three. Hence the nuclear option.

SandyRentool said:

RobD said:

SandyRentool said:

Plato_Says said:

You'd like less choice where you shop?

SandyRentool said:

I don't agree with "tax everyone else more". I would agree with "tax those with high earnings and/or high wealth and companies making high profits more". Otherwise, I'm a full-on Jezlamist.

Ten types of overpriced tat is still overpriced tat. An energy cartel isn't competition. Five different vans all delivering parcels to the same business park isn't efficient.

Employs five times as many people though.

Might explain the UK's lousy productivity then!

So you'd be happy to slash job opportunities for hard working Britons?

SandyRentool said:

blackburn63 said:

Being a Corbynite is fine as long as you accept that with him as leader Labour can't win a general election, not enough people share his views.

The problem was, we wouldn't win an election with any of the other three. Hence the nuclear option.

Kendall might well have been able to appeal to far more people than Kendall. Unfortunately, apparently she's a witch.

logical_song said:

Labour now has an activist base and a leader that is totally at odds with the majority of its MPs and voters. Something has got to give.

The obvious answer is to get rid of the traitorous pig dogging MPs.

DaemonBarber said:

Dair said:

Danny565 said:

FPT:

SandyRentool said:

Slackbladder said:

Dan Hodges ‏@DPJHodges 3 mins3 minutes ago

If mandatory reselection goes through it will send signal even Tom Watson can't mitigate Corbynite excesses, and that will be a big deal...

I am sure that loyal, hard-working MPs will see this as nothing more than a rubber stamping exercise.

The idea from some of these Labour MPs that they have a divine right to remain an MP forevermore without any accountability to activists is baffling.

I didn't even vote for Corbyn, but I would want my MP to be deselected if he started routinely voting with the Tories on things like Syria, welfare, etc.

Indeed.

Most people vote for a party most of the time. Sometimes local issues might be in play but the idea they vote for an individual is a complete fantasy of the democracy deniers in their ridiculous attempts to defend FPTP.

As people vote for a party, reselection should always take place to ensure the candidate reflects the parties views.

And the best part, if this analysis is wrong and the voters do vote for individuals, then a deselected candidate can just stand without the party label and by the democracy deniers logic, they would still win the seat.

Bwahahahhahahah

oh, you're not joking?

er...

Yeah. What a way to stamp out any form of individualism and dissent from a party.

RobD said:

DaemonBarber said:

Dair said:

Danny565 said:

FPT:

SandyRentool said:

Slackbladder said:

Dan Hodges ‏@DPJHodges 3 mins3 minutes ago

If mandatory reselection goes through it will send signal even Tom Watson can't mitigate Corbynite excesses, and that will be a big deal...

I am sure that loyal, hard-working MPs will see this as nothing more than a rubber stamping exercise.

The idea from some of these Labour MPs that they have a divine right to remain an MP forevermore without any accountability to activists is baffling.

I didn't even vote for Corbyn, but I would want my MP to be deselected if he started routinely voting with the Tories on things like Syria, welfare, etc.

Indeed.

Most people vote for a party most of the time. Sometimes local issues might be in play but the idea they vote for an individual is a complete fantasy of the democracy deniers in their ridiculous attempts to defend FPTP.

As people vote for a party, reselection should always take place to ensure the candidate reflects the parties views.

And the best part, if this analysis is wrong and the voters do vote for individuals, then a deselected candidate can just stand without the party label and by the democracy deniers logic, they would still win the seat.

Bwahahahhahahah

oh, you're not joking?

er...

Yeah. What a way to stamp out any form of individualism and dissent from a party.

Staggering isn't it? And all done under the banner of democracy!
Laughable
Yet also frustratingly, maddeningly happening here with nobody seeming to care.

l suppose we should be grateful for YouGov and their sponsor but it (ie ''Those who came to LAB to election the new leader have a very different view of the world'') is hardly a surprise.

JosiasJessop said:

SandyRentool said:

blackburn63 said:

Being a Corbynite is fine as long as you accept that with him as leader Labour can't win a general election, not enough people share his views.

The problem was, we wouldn't win an election with any of the other three. Hence the nuclear option.

Kendall might well have been able to appeal to far more people than Kendall. Unfortunately, apparently she's a witch.

The Newsnight focus group of swing voters rated Kendall as being worse than Corbyn, though.

SandyRentool said:

MarkHopkins said:

SandyRentool said:

Plato_Says said:

You'd like less choice where you shop?

SandyRentool said:

I don't agree with "tax everyone else more". I would agree with "tax those with high earnings and/or high wealth and companies making high profits more". Otherwise, I'm a full-on Jezlamist.

Ten types of overpriced tat is still overpriced tat. An energy cartel isn't competition. Five different vans all delivering parcels to the same business park isn't efficient.

Scary - you actually believe that?

So you think it IS efficient to have five different vans all delivering parcels to the same place, and that a cartel provides competition? I agree that 'tat' is a subjective description.

Cartel's are very rare, although of course they do exist.

And if you looked in the yellow pages (do they still exist?) you would see 50 different courier companies seeking your custom to deliver parcels to the same place.

But really, as others have noted, if you are unable to see the mechanics behind having many courier companies in competition with each other then there is probably not enough bandwith on PB.com to educate you otherwise.

Pulpstar said:

Just backed Scotland to win the world cup at 130-1...

What do you expect the effective odds will be if you cash out after the group (should Scotland manage to top the group) before they get spanked in the Quarters?

Danny565 said:

JosiasJessop said:

SandyRentool said:

blackburn63 said:

Being a Corbynite is fine as long as you accept that with him as leader Labour can't win a general election, not enough people share his views.

The problem was, we wouldn't win an election with any of the other three. Hence the nuclear option.

Kendall might well have been able to appeal to far more people than Kendall. Unfortunately, apparently she's a witch.

The Newsnight focus group of swing voters rated Kendall as being worse than Corbyn, though.

See my earlier reply.

JosiasJessop said:

SandyRentool said:

JosiasJessop said:

SandyRentool said:

blackburn63 said:

Being a Corbynite is fine as long as you accept that with him as leader Labour can't win a general election, not enough people share his views.

The problem was, we wouldn't win an election with any of the other three. Hence the nuclear option.

Kendall might well have been able to appeal to far more people than Kendall. Unfortunately, apparently she's a witch.

Kendall had the baggage of Blairism without the charisma of Blair. The reverse proposition would have made a stronger candidate, but it looks like none of our lot have that to offer.

I'm not sure I agree on that. She was hardly given a chance before Labour's assorted fruitcakes, sexists and loons started on her.

I saw her in the flesh at the hustings. Just an empty persona.

Cyclefree said:

Dair said:

Scott_P said:

@OliverCooper: Corbyn says Labour MPs will be forced to compete for reselection if Conference approves it. Countdown to the #purge. http://t.co/Yn1qTjdidZ

Mandatory reselection is merely democracy in action. It should be the standard situation in all political parties. That it is not present in either the Labour or Tory parties is a disgrace.

Democracy in action is the electorate in the constituency voting resulting in the election of that MP. You seem to wish to substitute the views of a small number of people within the party for the views of the far larger number of actual voters. Some might consider that a tad contemptuous of voters.

All these arguments and fights were had in the 1980's and very enjoyable they were too for those watching. Less so for the Labour party, I think.

As Dair says, it is not contemptuous of the general electorate - any deselected MP is free to put themselves forward for re-election as an independent.

But standing under a party banner (and thereby benefitting from the hard work that activists do and money they pay to make sure that party banner has any currency) is a privilege, not a right.

SandyRentool said:

JosiasJessop said:

SandyRentool said:

JosiasJessop said:

SandyRentool said:

blackburn63 said:

Being a Corbynite is fine as long as you accept that with him as leader Labour can't win a general election, not enough people share his views.

The problem was, we wouldn't win an election with any of the other three. Hence the nuclear option.

Kendall might well have been able to appeal to far more people than Kendall. Unfortunately, apparently she's a witch.

Kendall had the baggage of Blairism without the charisma of Blair. The reverse proposition would have made a stronger candidate, but it looks like none of our lot have that to offer.

I'm not sure I agree on that. She was hardly given a chance before Labour's assorted fruitcakes, sexists and loons started on her.

I saw her in the flesh at the hustings. Just an empty persona.

Really? I think you doth protest too much.

RobD said:

DaemonBarber said:

Dair said:

Danny565 said:

FPT:

SandyRentool said:

Slackbladder said:

Dan Hodges ‏@DPJHodges 3 mins3 minutes ago

If mandatory reselection goes through it will send signal even Tom Watson can't mitigate Corbynite excesses, and that will be a big deal...

I am sure that loyal, hard-working MPs will see this as nothing more than a rubber stamping exercise.

The idea from some of these Labour MPs that they have a divine right to remain an MP forevermore without any accountability to activists is baffling.

I didn't even vote for Corbyn, but I would want my MP to be deselected if he started routinely voting with the Tories on things like Syria, welfare, etc.

Indeed.

Most people vote for a party most of the time. Sometimes local issues might be in play but the idea they vote for an individual is a complete fantasy of the democracy deniers in their ridiculous attempts to defend FPTP.

As people vote for a party, reselection should always take place to ensure the candidate reflects the parties views.

And the best part, if this analysis is wrong and the voters do vote for individuals, then a deselected candidate can just stand without the party label and by the democracy deniers logic, they would still win the seat.

Bwahahahhahahah

oh, you're not joking?

er...

Yeah. What a way to stamp out any form of individualism and dissent from a party.

That's not what people are voting for.

People vote for a party and they should (quite rightly) expect their parties candidates to be willing to tow the party line.

If you want people to vote for individualism and dissent then start a party based on that.

Dair said:

RobD said:

DaemonBarber said:

Dair said:

Danny565 said:

FPT:

SandyRentool said:

Slackbladder said:

Dan Hodges ‏@DPJHodges 3 mins3 minutes ago

If mandatory reselection goes through it will send signal even Tom Watson can't mitigate Corbynite excesses, and that will be a big deal...

I am sure that loyal, hard-working MPs will see this as nothing more than a rubber stamping exercise.

The idea from some of these Labour MPs that they have a divine right to remain an MP forevermore without any accountability to activists is baffling.

I didn't even vote for Corbyn, but I would want my MP to be deselected if he started routinely voting with the Tories on things like Syria, welfare, etc.

Indeed.

Most people vote for a party most of the time. Sometimes local issues might be in play but the idea they vote for an individual is a complete fantasy of the democracy deniers in their ridiculous attempts to defend FPTP.

As people vote for a party, reselection should always take place to ensure the candidate reflects the parties views.

And the best part, if this analysis is wrong and the voters do vote for individuals, then a deselected candidate can just stand without the party label and by the democracy deniers logic, they would still win the seat.

Bwahahahhahahah

oh, you're not joking?

er...

Yeah. What a way to stamp out any form of individualism and dissent from a party.

That's not what people are voting for.

People vote for a party and they should (quite rightly) expect their parties candidates to be willing to tow the party line.

If you want people to vote for individualism and dissent then start a party based on that.

Is that true? I thought a personal vote was a real effect.

Off topic: I expect Winterkorn will avoid holidaying in the US any time soon.

antifrank said:

JEO said:

I guess most Jezlamists would see this data and argue that the soft left has just not been converted yet because no-one's made the argument to them.

From another site that I visit, two responses to the table above were as follows:

"for about the 100th time, the focus of politics should be persuasion and convincing the undecided, not just upping sticks and shifting your principles towards current vogues or norms.

Corbyn supporters think he would be a better PM than Osborne. No shit! But this means it is up to Corbyn to persuade the uncertain and the opposed, not that we all shrug our shoulders and revert to the status quo with a meek sigh."

and

"The Labour party shouldn't be some fucking wine-waiter, offering a menu to the electorate and eagerly offering to deliver unto them that which they walked in to the room with a desire for.

Our job is to change peoples' minds, challenge the existing narrative, offer people hope that they can have something to look forward to other than poverty, and a dwindling supply of opportunity. Remember "Things Can Only Get Better"? Right now, what the majority of the PLP are offering is "Things Can Only Get Slightly Less-Worse". And they wonder why the party membership has turned on them?"

You have to admire their dauntless optimism.

That is a Labour party which is in Broadcast Mode only.

I have some sympathy for the view that good politicians try to change people's minds.

But if you want to get people to change their mind, the most important thing to do is to listen to them, do more listening than talking and get them to change their own minds almost without realising it so rather than think that they now agree with Corbyn or whoever it looks as if Labour is now a party with a leader who thinks like them, who is on their side.

Successful political parties are those who - at some very basic level - are listening to what people are saying, what they are saying in private. They don't shout "You Must" at the voter.

Cyclefree said:

Dair said:

Scott_P said:

@OliverCooper: Corbyn says Labour MPs will be forced to compete for reselection if Conference approves it. Countdown to the #purge. http://t.co/Yn1qTjdidZ

Mandatory reselection is merely democracy in action. It should be the standard situation in all political parties. That it is not present in either the Labour or Tory parties is a disgrace.

Democracy in action is the electorate in the constituency voting resulting in the election of that MP.

If that is not a lie, then they do not need the party endorsement.

They can stand as independents and be elected quite freely.

Beverley_C said:

DaemonBarber said:

Beverley_C said:

Corbyn, pigs, yada yada

The new novel is "The Osbourne Ascendency"

Oh... and for those who like cars, I am starting to wonder if Volkswagen and Volkswagen dealerships will survive much longer. A sniff of Ratner in the air methinks (or is it excess emissions?)

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/road-and-rail-transport/11883357/vw-scandal-petrol-car-risk.html

Not Ratner... their products (with some exceptions) were crap.

Nobody is saying that the VW Golf etc are suddenly shit.

True, but if you had £10+K in your pocket, would YOU buy a new Volkswagen tomorrow? Cash flow interruptions can kill businesses

We need a second car in a month, and I'm considering doing just that. There's a risk, but I might be able to screw them down on a really good deal. Even though I'm not a particularly good haggler.

And if they do go bust, there's so many about that there will be a very good independent dealer and parts ecosystems.

RobD said:

Dair said:

RobD said:

DaemonBarber said:

Dair said:

Danny565 said:

FPT:

SandyRentool said:

Slackbladder said:

Dan Hodges ‏@DPJHodges 3 mins3 minutes ago

If mandatory reselection goes through it will send signal even Tom Watson can't mitigate Corbynite excesses, and that will be a big deal...

I am sure that loyal, hard-working MPs will see this as nothing more than a rubber stamping exercise.

The idea from some of these Labour MPs that they have a divine right to remain an MP forevermore without any accountability to activists is baffling.

I didn't even vote for Corbyn, but I would want my MP to be deselected if he started routinely voting with the Tories on things like Syria, welfare, etc.

Indeed.

Most people vote for a party most of the time. Sometimes local issues might be in play but the idea they vote for an individual is a complete fantasy of the democracy deniers in their ridiculous attempts to defend FPTP.

As people vote for a party, reselection should always take place to ensure the candidate reflects the parties views.

And the best part, if this analysis is wrong and the voters do vote for individuals, then a deselected candidate can just stand without the party label and by the democracy deniers logic, they would still win the seat.

Bwahahahhahahah

oh, you're not joking?

er...

Yeah. What a way to stamp out any form of individualism and dissent from a party.

That's not what people are voting for.

People vote for a party and they should (quite rightly) expect their parties candidates to be willing to tow the party line.

If you want people to vote for individualism and dissent then start a party based on that.

Is that true? I thought a personal vote was a real effect.

It's quite rare, and marginal - Tim Farron has a decent personal vote... Alistair Carmichael certainly didn't at the GE to pick two examples.

Pulpstar said:

isam said:

We need to 'raise awareness' of Premier League football in China apparently...

https://twitter.com/tommctague/status/646708496138924032

Was the Hinkley point bung not enough !?

Looks like the Chinese have seen George coming from a mile off.

I am sure the Chinese kids have never heard of Man Utd, City, Arsenal or Chelsea

They've prob got posters of George Osborne on their bedroom walls, not Rayne Looney

Why trust the free market when state intervention will do?

It seems Dennis Skinner has achieved a great deal for his constituents in his 45 years as MP:

"Meanwhile, Bolsover in Derbyshire came lowest for happiness, worthiness and life satisfaction."

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-34336951

I'm slightly surprised to see Cannock Chase rate so low.

Cyclefree said:

antifrank said:

JEO said:

I guess most Jezlamists would see this data and argue that the soft left has just not been converted yet because no-one's made the argument to them.

From another site that I visit, two responses to the table above were as follows:

"for about the 100th time, the focus of politics should be persuasion and convincing the undecided, not just upping sticks and shifting your principles towards current vogues or norms.

Corbyn supporters think he would be a better PM than Osborne. No shit! But this means it is up to Corbyn to persuade the uncertain and the opposed, not that we all shrug our shoulders and revert to the status quo with a meek sigh."

and

"The Labour party shouldn't be some fucking wine-waiter, offering a menu to the electorate and eagerly offering to deliver unto them that which they walked in to the room with a desire for.

Our job is to change peoples' minds, challenge the existing narrative, offer people hope that they can have something to look forward to other than poverty, and a dwindling supply of opportunity. Remember "Things Can Only Get Better"? Right now, what the majority of the PLP are offering is "Things Can Only Get Slightly Less-Worse". And they wonder why the party membership has turned on them?"

You have to admire their dauntless optimism.

That is a Labour party which is in Broadcast Mode only.

I have some sympathy for the view that good politicians try to change people's minds.

But if you want to get people to change their mind, the most important thing to do is to listen to them, do more listening than talking and get them to change their own minds almost without realising it so rather than think that they now agree with Corbyn or whoever it looks as if Labour is now a party with a leader who thinks like them, who is on their side.

Successful political parties are those who - at some very basic level - are listening to what people are saying, what they are saying in private. They don't shout "You Must" at the voter.

Post of the day. Even Ed Miliband's wagging finger was most off-putting to my parents' generation. Corbyn's entire career has been defined by attack, support of those wanting to force their will on Britain, and braying sweet left wing 'You must' nothings from the backbenches - as this polling indicates, he will be a disaster for Labour.

isam said:

Pulpstar said:

isam said:

We need to 'raise awareness' of Premier League football in China apparently...

https://twitter.com/tommctague/status/646708496138924032

Was the Hinkley point bung not enough !?

Looks like the Chinese have seen George coming from a mile off.

I am sure the Chinese kids have never heard of Man Utd, City, Arsenal or Chelsea

They've prob got posters of George Osborne on their bedroom walls, not Rayne Looney

Why trust the free market when state intervention will do?

Do you object to the scheme in general? It's been running since 2007 around the world. It's geared to teaching English through football, as explained here:

http://www.britishcouncil.org/society/sport/current-programmes/premier-skills

Do you object to the scheme operating in China? As the article notes, it's long-running there too.

Or is it just that you object to it being extended to Xinjiang province, which is what was announced this week?

Given that football is specifically associated with Britain among the Anglosphere countries, it looks like a novel way of getting some soft influence.