Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

Political polling

Ben Goldacre's view was widely shared among the blairites a few weeks ago - just rub their faces in this.

View attachment 108293

That line really cunts me off, there's been variations from Nick Cohen et al, really infuriating - I support Corbyn and I am going to vote Labour because of him. I didn't put him in power cos I'm not in the party and I also wouldn't vote Labour if it was any of the other candidates. So if Corbyn did lose badly how exactly would that be my fault, but not the fault of the journalists endlessly writing articles and tweeting about how shit he is?
 
just think we need a change of direction and at worst to get these ideas in the mainstream.
Personally that's possibly the most important thing about this election for me. Like most, I doubt Labour will win, and I'm not convinced Corbyn is ready (or has the team) to make a success of it if they miraculously do, but the discourse has been dragged so far right over the past 20 years that just to have these sorts of ideas taken seriously would be such a relief.
 
I don't like a lot of JC's politics tbh, for example I don't think he's an antisemite himself but I think he's sometimes been too weak on standing up to those types of his supporters (although im kinda enjoying the prospect of the dismay of those anti-imperialist types when they discover he's not going to be what they hoped :D), don't like a lot of the STWC stuff , the support of Assad etc (although I don't know if he's actually said anything in support of him, but a lot of his supporters definitely have). I also think he comes across as a bit dithery at times :D

But let's face it he probably wont do much of what the STWC lot are demanding and has the potential to do a bit of good for people renting and the like. and i'm enjoying the prospect of seeing some tories crying. I also dont think he is as crazy about power as she is - i cant see him wanting to read the emails of everyone in the country or have dreams of staying in power indefinitely lol, so yeah.
 
Last edited:
I also dont think he is as crazy about power as she is - i cant see him wanting to read the emails of everyone in the country or have dreams of staying in power indefinitely lol, so yeah.
I've been wondering if that's something people are responding to, consciously or unconsciously. His history as a backbencher is generally taken as a clear sign that he's in it for 'the right reasons' and believes the stuff he campaigns on. Even if they don't share his beliefs, I get the feeling there's a certain amount of grudging respect for that after the conveyor belt of weather vane politicians who believe in whatever they think will get them more power.

Of course, there's probably just as many who think he's a dogmatic, scruffy little hermit who shouldn't have any more power than secretary of the local allotment association.
 
and yeah I think it is a lot like trump tbh. people are fed up. the tories have been in for seven years and done no good to anyone. of course corbs won't do a lot either if he gets in (which he probably wont) but I think telling everyone how bad it is to vote for someone and how it will create a 'coalition of chaos' is never going to go well.
 
Ipsos Mori have Tories on 45%, Labour on 40% and Libdems on 7%.

Labour + Tory vote = 85%

I don't think that's happened in my lifetime. The idea of Labour cracking the 40% mark and still lagging 5 points behind just doesn't compute with me. Given that this election is not dividing on class lines but more on young v old lines and given this almost 50's/60's level of support for the two frontrunners I think we are going to see carnage on election night with lots of seats being lost by all parties. Don't trust the models that predict seat numbers even if you trust the polls themselves (which you shouldn't).
 
I think telling everyone how bad it is to vote for someone and how it will create a 'coalition of chaos' is never going to go well.
It's weird actually, because we're constantly told how fear is used to rule us, and it's hard to argue against that exactly, but if you look at Trump, Brexit and now this GE, the fear-mongering campaigning seems to have had basically the opposite effect.

I suppose those are all bit more 'anti-status quo' votes, but it's still suggest fear alone doesn't always work.
 
at the hustings I went to the tory was robotically going on about the coalition of chaos, at one point she was talking about Corbyn 'finding his way into downing street' and people were yelling out 'that's rubbish' etc :D
 
At one point she said that she voted for a particular policy, then when she finished talking the labour candidate said 'can I just point out that she voted against it five times' :D:D:D:D:D
 
I suppose this is going to out me a bit, but I do not care. I did canvassing today for Labour in what is supposed to be a marginal constituency and I can now absolutely believe the polls. This is the sort of working-class, pro-Leave area that was supposed to be going over to May and I only met a single Tory voter. One single Labour voter who was angry about Corbyn and wasn't voting as a result, lots of Labour voters proudly saying that they will vote Labour again and a handful of Green and Lib Dem voters who said that they were going to vote Labour this time.

I expected a lot of hostility towards Corbyn but instead it really was a mix of people who liked him, really liked him and were indifferent to him. Somewhere along the line this policy of having an entire campaign based around attacking Corbyn has gone very wrong.
 
I suppose this is going to out me a bit, but I do not care. I did canvassing today for Labour in what is supposed to be a marginal constituency and I can now absolutely believe the polls. This is the sort of working-class, pro-Leave area that was supposed to be going over to May and I only met a single Tory voter. One single Labour voter who was angry about Corbyn and wasn't voting as a result, lots of Labour voters proudly saying that they will vote Labour again and a handful of Green and Lib Dem voters who said that they were going to vote Labour this time.

I expected a lot of hostility towards Corbyn but instead it really was a mix of people who liked him, really liked him and were indifferent to him. Somewhere along the line this policy of having an entire campaign based around attacking Corbyn has gone very wrong.

Which constituency? You seem to be Brum based - Erdington?
 
Yup, it has to be remembered that all the pollsters (save YouGov) are still predicting a comfortable Tory majority. (They're all assuming that the people Corbyn has enthused, primarily young people, won't turn out on the day. Even those who, but for the weighting-for-voting-likelihood, would have Corbyn ahead).

However, May is not doing well. She called an unnecessary election (people don't like that), after saying she wouldn't (people don't like that), she u-turned on her manifesto within days, she won't speak to people, won't do debates, repeats stock phrases without regard to the relevance to the question, and has virtually gone into hiding. The "weak and wobbly" jibe seems to be starting to hit home. And now the election expenses row has reared up again, and with links to CCHQ (Marion Little). She has to be hoping nothing else will go wrong before next Thursday. However, I just don't think Corbyn has enough time before then to reap the benefits.
interesting thing about the Ipso poll is that is shows labour are slightly ahead in all of the self reported likely to vote categories for this time from 10/10 to 6/10.

They must be downgrading those figures purely on the 2015 statistics / the always, usually, depends category of whether people usually vote or not, which seems a mathodology that's highly likely to prove wrong at this election to me.

Also not looking good for lib dems with nearly half of their support considering voting for another party, though I suspect mostly that would be in the lab / tory marginals.
 
I expected a lot of hostility towards Corbyn but instead it really was a mix of people who liked him, really liked him and were indifferent to him. Somewhere along the line this policy of having an entire campaign based around attacking Corbyn has gone very wrong.

I do wonder whether the smear campaign when he first got in unintentionally acted in the same way as a trade union inoculation strategy — this time around no-one's shocked, no dead cat.
 
I do wonder whether the smear campaign when he first got in unintentionally acted in the same way as a trade union inoculation strategy — this time around no-one's shocked, no dead cat.

Honestly just since the election was called or so the most hostility I've encountered towards Corbyn has come from Remainer liberals. They fucking hate him, and for like no reason... it's like those Clintonite idiots who are still angry at Bernie Sanders.
 
I suppose this is going to out me a bit
sutherland_invasion_1978.jpg
 
Honestly just since the election was called or so the most hostility I've encountered towards Corbyn has come from Remainer liberals. They fucking hate him, and for like no reason... it's like those Clintonite idiots who are still angry at Bernie Sanders.

My mum is one of those...she is going to vote for him though because she hates theresa may so much.
 
Honestly just since the election was called or so the most hostility I've encountered towards Corbyn has come from Remainer liberals. They fucking hate him, and for like no reason... it's like those Clintonite idiots who are still angry at Bernie Sanders.

One more reason to vote for Corbyn and then we can put to rest any fantasies The Economist has about creating a "new party of the radical centre".
 
A "new party of the radical centre" would be amazing though, watching Blair and his acolytes going in guns blazing and blelatedly realising with rising horror that their powder is nothing more than sand and fag ash would be the most fun.

I'd rather not have to go through the experience of seeing and hearing any more of Blair, we had ten years of that crap and that was more than enough.

Besides, the hegemony of liberalism is now in steep decline across the entire world, it is a system and ideology that has degenerated to such an extent that it can no longer answer any of the problems we face and it can no longer provide the goods. So no need for any more liberal charades as it self-evident and clear for all to see that liberalism is now on it's death bed.
 
A "new party of the radical centre" would be amazing though, watching Blair and his acolytes going in guns blazing and blelatedly realising with rising horror that their powder is nothing more than sand and fag ash would be the most fun.


on that note -
The election shows why a new centrist party would struggle

a week after the EU referendum, an ally of George Osborne approached Liberal Democrat leader Tim Farron and suggested the creation of a new centrist party called “the Democrats” (the then chancellor had already pitched the idea to Labour MPs). For nearly two years, conversations such as this one have been taking place among senior politicians. Peter Mandelson, according to Labour figures, is one of those "serious" about creating a new party. This week's Economist endorses the Liberal Democrats as a "down payment" on such a project.
 
I'd rather not have to go through the experience of seeing and hearing any more of Blair, we had ten years of that crap and that was more than enough.

Besides, the hegemony of liberalism is now in steep decline across the entire world, it is a system and ideology that has degenerated to such an extent that it can no longer answer any of the problems we face and it can no longer provide the goods. So no need for any more liberal charades as it self-evident and clear for all to see that liberalism is now on it's death bed.
so what comes next?
 
Christ, that article gave me sick in my mouth. "Liberals have to colonise existing parties". Anyone on these boards who still moans about "liberal" being a swear word should be forced to read that filth.
A very peculiar one too. On the one hand arguing that there's a strand of liberalism that extends across all three parties but then arguing for colonisation which would surely have these liberals working in opposition to each other rather than together.

Shit in every way.
 
A very peculiar one too. On the one hand arguing that there's a strand of liberalism that extends across all three parties but then arguing for colonisation which would surely have these liberals working in opposition to each other rather than together.

Shit in every way.
Oh it's worse than that, I'm afraid. He's arguing for a "reeducation" of party politics back towards all-party liberal consensus. Notice he starts by saying this is a project "Cameroons", "Blairites" and "Cleggites" are all involved in. That none of them feel politically at home now. He's talking about "Centrist" forces that the Economist can get behind reshaping all the parties back towards convergence. So that the choice is no choice. It's a liberal entryist coup.
 
Back
Top Bottom