Labour leadership
- Thread starter oryx
- Start date
SpookyFrank
A cheap source of teeth for aquarium gravel
And polls, as we learned at the last general election, are never wrong.
YouSir
Retired from Urban
Pointless observation really. Polls 5 years before the election about someone who isn't even leader of their own party yet. About as meaningful as an Andy Burnham speech.
andysays
Love and solidarity
If I was a Guardian columnist, I'd probably say it was further proof that Corbyn was a dangerous extremist who appeals to racist idiots, and that the important task of choosing the Labour leader shouldn't be trusted to the ignorant masses, but should instead be left to sensible right-thinking people such as Guardian columnists and their friends.
SpookyFrank
A cheap source of teeth for aquarium gravel
But is it what the poll said? I think we shoud be told.
YouSir
Retired from Urban
My inside sources say no, it isn't. But shush, don't tell anyone.
andysays
Love and solidarity
It may have been linked to already, but what poll are we talking about here (and what does it say
)?
Andrew Hertford
Chocolate Jesus
So not completely different to what I said.
Labour will need around 40% of the vote to win a majority in 2020, what do you think they'll get with JC as leader?
wtfftw
melting like a toastie
Noddle credit reports say if you're on the electoral roll. Probably not acceptable proof and pretty detailed on other info but still, possible avenue.
As for what vote Corbyn would get in 2020, who knows?
What we do know is that with the entire establishment and media against him, and before he's had the opportunity to give more than a brief outline of the policies he'd like to introduce, before he's faced Cameron at the dispatch box and before he's really made much impression on the public at large, he's the candidate who most people think would make them more likely to vote Labour, the candidate most popular with the general public and the candidate with the biggest support within the party - by a huge margin.
I don't know if that means he can win against the tories come 2020, but it certainly utterly contradicts the other candidates (and media, and establishment) claims that his policies are not credible with the British public, and that he can't win - by the numbers there, if Corbyn can't win then the others can't win either, and they'll lose harder.
What we do know is that with the entire establishment and media against him, and before he's had the opportunity to give more than a brief outline of the policies he'd like to introduce, before he's faced Cameron at the dispatch box and before he's really made much impression on the public at large, he's the candidate who most people think would make them more likely to vote Labour, the candidate most popular with the general public and the candidate with the biggest support within the party - by a huge margin.
I don't know if that means he can win against the tories come 2020, but it certainly utterly contradicts the other candidates (and media, and establishment) claims that his policies are not credible with the British public, and that he can't win - by the numbers there, if Corbyn can't win then the others can't win either, and they'll lose harder.
Exactly that. That's a point I made earlier. It's how dim she is that I find the most depressing angle of the fact that anybody would even nominate her.
andysays
Love and solidarity
Out of interest (because I'm still not sure what poll is being discussed here
) what are the comparable figures for the other three contenders?If, as suggested, they are all worse than Corbyn's, that suggests two things
- The best leader in electoral terms ATM would be Corbyn
- The idea that Labour does better by trying to emulate the Tories/not going too far to the left is no longer one that will work, if it ever was
Cheer up. If you were Ken Loach or Mark Steel, you'd have been told you were not allowed to vote, cos of not being hip to the values and aims or whatever the phrase is.
Andrew Hertford
Chocolate Jesus
As you say, nobody knows, but the media are presenting this poll as an indication that 32% of voters being 'more likely' to vote Labour (instead of 'could' if you want to be pedantic) as a triumph for the Corbyn camp, but it isn't, Labour need to be putting forward policies and a candidate for leader who will appeal to voters across the board if they want to replace the tories in 2020 and I can't see JC ever being that candidate, can you?
At the moment it looks like a huge number of Labour members would rather stay in principled opposition and let the tories continue to eat away at public services well into the next decade.
andysays
Love and solidarity
My vague recollection is that you're something of a Blairite (apologies if I've got that wrong).
Who would be your preferred leader, and what do you think their prospects might be at the next GE?
I'm not being pedantic, you're just misreading (or misrepresenting, I'm not sure which) the figures from the poll.
It isn't saying 32% of respondents would vote Labour with Corbyn as leader - it's saying that 32% of respondents would be more likely to vote Labour.
So within the remaining 68% will be lifelong labour supporters who would vote Labour whatever, and lifelong tory supporters who wouldn't under any circumstances. And within the 32% are people who won't vote labour, but might look more favourably on them under Corbyn - so the 32% doesn't really bear any relation to the usual polling question (if there was a general election tomorrow which party would you vote for) as it's a different question, looking for a different answer.
It isn't saying 32% of respondents would vote Labour with Corbyn as leader - it's saying that 32% of respondents would be more likely to vote Labour.
So within the remaining 68% will be lifelong labour supporters who would vote Labour whatever, and lifelong tory supporters who wouldn't under any circumstances. And within the 32% are people who won't vote labour, but might look more favourably on them under Corbyn - so the 32% doesn't really bear any relation to the usual polling question (if there was a general election tomorrow which party would you vote for) as it's a different question, looking for a different answer.
i recently attended one of the Corbyn rallies in Scotland. Although its a difficult assessment to make, i came away with a strong impression that many who had attended were not the usual types who regularly turn out to worthy (or lost) cause meetings. CND were present, but i didn't notice anyone selling socialist papers or seeking to generate support for this or that issue. Speakers from the floor (i wasn't selected 
) raised straight forward matters for Jeremy to answer - a good example being the issue posed by a young women who was concerned about the ongoing denigration of disabled people in the media and more generally, and that she wondered whether it would be possible for a future Corbyn administration to turn that around. He answered the point meticulously well, accepting the difficulties of the task, but stating in a very forthright way that those at the bottom of society, in particular those less able than most are bearing the brunt of Tory attacks, and that he would attempt to confront the notion that disabled people are fair game for scapegoating by those peddling divisive and disgusting ideas. The evidence from the rally suggested to me that Corbyn is tapping a deep well of opposition to Conservative Britain, and he is doing it rather well, in quite an understated way.
i imagine that few could have predicted this might begin to happen - even amongst those who take a keen interest in such matters. But happening it is. It would surely be a mistake for those on the left who oppose 'parliamentary cretinism' to simply stand and stare as such an opportunity begins to develop? The trouble is, i can't work out what an appropriate response might be. Joining Labour would feel like an act of total betrayal of socialist principles.
Maybe sitting in the armchair wins?
) raised straight forward matters for Jeremy to answer - a good example being the issue posed by a young women who was concerned about the ongoing denigration of disabled people in the media and more generally, and that she wondered whether it would be possible for a future Corbyn administration to turn that around. He answered the point meticulously well, accepting the difficulties of the task, but stating in a very forthright way that those at the bottom of society, in particular those less able than most are bearing the brunt of Tory attacks, and that he would attempt to confront the notion that disabled people are fair game for scapegoating by those peddling divisive and disgusting ideas. The evidence from the rally suggested to me that Corbyn is tapping a deep well of opposition to Conservative Britain, and he is doing it rather well, in quite an understated way. i imagine that few could have predicted this might begin to happen - even amongst those who take a keen interest in such matters. But happening it is. It would surely be a mistake for those on the left who oppose 'parliamentary cretinism' to simply stand and stare as such an opportunity begins to develop? The trouble is, i can't work out what an appropriate response might be. Joining Labour would feel like an act of total betrayal of socialist principles.
Maybe sitting in the armchair wins?
i recently attended one of the Corbyn rallies in Scotland. Although its a difficult assessment to make, i came away with a strong impression that many who had attended were not the usual types who regularly turn out to worthy (or lost) cause meetings. CND were present, but i didn't notice anyone selling socialist papers or seeking to generate support for this or that issue. Speakers from the floor (i wasn't selected
i imagine that few could have predicted this might begin to happen - even amongst those who take a keen interest in such matters. But happening it is. It would surely be a mistake for those on the left who oppose 'parliamentary cretinism' to simply stand and stare as such an opportunity begins to develop? The trouble is, i can't work out what an appropriate response might be. Joining Labour would feel like an act of total betrayal of socialist principles.
Maybe sitting in the armchair wins?
I thinks this is great news, the sort of people who seem to be getting involved now may be the kind that don't flit from issue to issue for the membership 'dividend' or blithely follow a youth based activism which focusses on the exciting and the immediate, that understands Left politics is a long and often dull slog, I went to a music venue last night, its a very progressive outfit, run by a collective, but usually politics is not discussed, earwigging, all I could hear was 'corbyn', 'corbyn', etc.
Speakers from the floor (i wasn't selected
Exactly, at a local Peoples Assembly meeting recently, some of us raised the issue of the crisis in social care, generally there wasn't much interest, the then usual SWP suspects brought up the imminent anti-EDl rally and the buzz began...
btw, not one of them turned up for the social care meeting
red & green
Well-Known Member
Blair won election first term on an anti Tory vote alone after the abject misery of the thatcher regime and what followed .
What is happening at the moment in the Labour Party reminds me of a reverse 1982 situation
What is happening at the moment in the Labour Party reminds me of a reverse 1982 situation
free spirit
more tea vicar?
polls today, not polls after 5 years of ripping the tory's economic record to shreds - something milliband and balls gave up attempting after the first couple of years.
Real terms GDP per capita is still below the 2008 peak, 7 years on, making this by far the longest time taken to recover from a recession in post war UK history. It's pretty much undisputable that this has been caused by the choice to implement austerity policies at completely the wrong point in the economic cycle, rather than using government spending to boost economic activity in 2010-12 as should have been done.
Yet not once did I hear the Labour party pointing this out at the last election, and their policies would have simply continued down the same road.
free spirit
more tea vicar?
agreed. I read your posts after responding to that one.
The39thStep
Urban critical thinker
Its increasingly a big issue
Similar threads
