They seem to be trying to have a bit of fun despite clearly being told not to mention it (Singling out "beef" as a quote and choosing "Raw revenge" as a subheading)
Jeremy Corbyn - Not Not Labour Party(?), not a Communist (BBC)
- Thread starter unchanged_lineup
- Start date
They seem to be trying to have a bit of fun despite clearly being told not to mention it (Singling out "beef" as a quote and choosing "Raw revenge" as a subheading)
@sun_tzu compared this to Thatcher's being tagged with the Milk Snatcher title, a circumstance which offers both good and bad news for Cameron:
The Good - Even should Ashcroft's claims be entirely accurate, it nonetheless remains a personal story from his youth and lacks any links to policy in the present.
The Bad - The accusation needn't be truthful for the mud to stick. Abolishing free milk for all school children was neither a policy nor something she was in favour of.
How does he respond at PMQs or the like? Call gammon on the pig story, albeit in a self-depricating style. Admit that he did enjoy to party and that things could indeed get pretty wild at times, emphasise "wild" for the laughs.
"But pinko, you're just my type."
The Good - Even should Ashcroft's claims be entirely accurate, it nonetheless remains a personal story from his youth and lacks any links to policy in the present.
The Bad - The accusation needn't be truthful for the mud to stick. Abolishing free milk for all school children was neither a policy nor something she was in favour of.
How does he respond at PMQs or the like? Call gammon on the pig story, albeit in a self-depricating style. Admit that he did enjoy to party and that things could indeed get pretty wild at times, emphasise "wild" for the laughs.
"But pinko, you're just my type."
No PMQs for a while due to conferences, it'll have probably died down by then.@sun_tzu drew a parallel with Thatcher's being tagged with the Milk Snatcher title, a circumstance which offers both good and bad news for Cameron:
The Good - Even should Ashcroft's claims be entirely accurate, this remains a personal story from his youth and lacks any links to policy in the present.
The Bad - The accusation needn't be truthful for the mud to stick. Abolishing free milk for all school children was neither a policy nor something she was in favour of.
How does he respond at PMQs or the like? Call gammon on the pig story, albeit in a self-depricating style. Admit that he did enjoy to party and that things could indeed get pretty wild at times, emphasise "wild" for the laughs.
"But pinko, you're just my type."
Interestingly, Corbyn won't be able to refer to it in pmqs, it'd undermine his attempts to tone down proceedings. Indeed it makes me wonder where he would draw that line.
I'm sure there'll be a few backbenchers and SNP who'll get to sneak a few quips in for him.
I'd forgotten that they were upon us already. I suspect that the Conservative hierarchy will use the occasion to take soundings on Syria, should there be enough support that vote will be the story of the early-Autumn.
Ironically I think he may have even referred to the plague of "animal noises" from the chamber recently
His twitter account favourited, then quickly un-favourited this...
Thankfully, I've not forgotten about conference season, and as the tories seem to want to continue to rub our noses in their shit up here in Manchester by hosting their conference in town again this year, I've booked a holiday so I don't have to look at their 'hard working' faces on the way to one of my four jobs.
So you booked a holiday to avoid bumping into the conservative conference? Do you work at the venue?
No, but I have to pass it twice a day and if you've been to Manchester lately you'll know that it's an absolute nightmare to get around at the moment - this will make it even more unbearable, politics aside, when they start to barrier all that off too. Then add the protests on top of all that and it seems a wise move to get out of the city for the week.
Labour's saviour
I think she raises a lot of good points, however unpopular they may be. Similar points have been made elsewhere on this forum: meat eating as a lifestyle choice for people is not sustainable at current levels with a rising population, regardless of people's views on animal welfare.
Check out that huge jump on people who think the party is extreme.
Here's the data.
https://www.ipsos-mori.com/research...but-Cameron-leads-on-other-PM-attributes.aspx
In fairness I also saw that Cameron was pretty woeful on these sorts of questions even in 07, it was mainly the crash that started turning his numbers around. Then again, he was at least moderating the Tory positions to be more in line with public opinion which then enabled him to benefit from the slump. And the satisfaction numbers you also posted are pretty inarguably bad.
Looking at those numbers people seem think that Cameron is a more capable leader than Corbyn while at the same time agreeing that he(Cameron) is more out of touch, less trust worthy and more style over substance. So why do these people think Cameron is a more capable leader ?
And they also seem to agree that the Conservative keeps their promises more than Labour while at the same time admitting that they think Conservative will promise anything to win votes.
Very odd.
Last edited:
I imagine a poll of Tory PMs would give you the similar results at any point in modern history. The point in the Tories is that they're seen as getting the job done, and no-one cares if they're nasty.
Its an asymmetry that's wounded the Labour Party many times over the years (often a self-inflicted wound). The Labour Party has to be seen as both competent and honest, with the Tories competence is enough.
I'd say perception of leadership has a lot to do with what those being led are doing.
In the first week it didn't even look like Corbyn can lead his own party what with all the anonymous and unanonymous quotes being given to the press undermining him. This early on I would lay that blame on the party itself rather than Corbyn. One could argue that a stronger leader would have been able to force this themselves but he never really had a chance.
If they had got behind him and closed ranks - and shown that they support the opinion of the Labour party as a whole - then I would imagine Corbyn's perception as an effective leader would be better (not saying it would be better than Cameron's rating, but it would be far better than what it is).
I expect they are doing it so that once they force him out they can legitimately distance themselves from the man and his views.
They will also be distancing themselves from any future vote of mine. I don't want to vote for a party with no backbone. I wonder if others feel the same way.
I think this is wishful thinking. Table including Ed's ratings pre-election:
Looks likelier they think Corbyn's just more of the same stuff they didn't like about Ed. Also worth bearing in mind that Labour as a party always ran well ahead of Miliband in terms of popularity - if the party as a whole is now being damaged due to the direction Corbyn is taking (and such huge leaps in perceptions of being extreme, divided and out of date certainly point that way), it seems evidence that the polls are likelier to go down rather than up.
Yeah. That's going to help labour get elected
To early for comparisons. Kerry McCarthy needs to keep those kind of opinions to herself . Don't want the Tory media to start labelling them the looney left.
I think this is wishful thinking. Table including Ed's ratings pre-election:
Looks likelier they think Corbyn's just more of the same stuff they didn't like about Ed. Also worth bearing in mind that Labour as a party always ran well ahead of Miliband in terms of popularity - if the party as a whole is now being damaged due to the direction Corbyn is taking (and such huge leaps in perceptions of being extreme, divided and out of date certainly point that way), it seems evidence that the polls are likelier to go down rather than up.
Is that pre or post bae of pigs?
(Presumably pre)
I think this is wishful thinking. Table including Ed's ratings pre-election:
Looks likelier they think Corbyn's just more of the same stuff they didn't like about Ed. Also worth bearing in mind that Labour as a party always ran well ahead of Miliband in terms of popularity - if the party as a whole is now being damaged due to the direction Corbyn is taking (and such huge leaps in perceptions of being extreme, divided and out of date certainly point that way), it seems evidence that the polls are likelier to go down rather than up.
I'm not saying Labour and Corbyn would succeed if they all got behind him, just that they definitely will fail if they carry on as they are. And that whoever the next leader is after Corbyn, Labour won't be getting my vote if things go down how they seem to be going down.
Fieldwork was 19-23rd by the looks of it, so two days without it and two days with. No-one really seems to care.
His net favourability among the public has been the same since long before he won the election. (7th Sept, 16th Aug) I don't think that the results should be pinned on anyone but him (they will be of course, the PLP will take the blame)
re the bit in bold - this is the thing that terrifies me about Corbyn. He's promised people the moon, and if they don't get it they're not going to blame him - they're going to blame Labour.
That's not a fair assumption. If he gets a fair chance and fails then fair enough. It's the actions of many in the Labour party in the run up to his election and the week following that have exasperated me and I can see them continuing. I don't think he's had a fair chance from his own party. If it was just him in isolation then even that wouldn't bother me too much but they are disrespecting the massive majority that voted for him.
They're also nonsense. I mean shock horror that after the media telling everyone he's a loony extremist who'll divide the party they happen to believe he's a loony extremist who'll divide the party.
It's almost as if in the absence of knowing anything tat the media have influence, who'd of thought.
It'll take him a long time to press upon the public his own image before he can begin to replace the media's representation of him.
Given that he's spent the entire summer riding on the crest of a social media driven wave of positivity & popularity, what's going to happen over the coming years that hasn't happened already would you say?
That's unexpected been positivity and popularity among Labour members. A lot of people outside of those circles don't know who he is or what he stands for outside of newspaper front page headlines.
Exactly what was said about Ed. For five years. It's fantasy.
It baffles me why they get involved, it really does. I mean let's be realistic, for all people's opinions and whatever facts there may be on whatever is healthier and better for the environment, we aren't all going vegan anytime soon. So why the feck do these clowns open their mouths and force an unpopular opinion down people's throats?
Sure it's something that should be looked at, sure there's room for movement in that area, but when you are desperately behind and you need to claw back as many voters as you can, do you really bleat on about something you personally have a strong opinion on knowing full well it's going to be picked apart?
I've said it before and I'm sure I'll say it again, but it really looks like Labour are happy to be shadow and just collect their money at times. It's almost as if they sabotage themselves on purpose.
Labour have fecked up, pure and simple. No amount of positive PR in the next few years is going to get rid of their image as a bunch of moaning Guardian* posters who no longer have to shout into a megaphone on a soapbox because someone has given them a tie clip microphone to wear on Newsnight instead. They'll become completely unelectable if their ministers continue to spout shite like this in a preachy manner.
We all know that David Cameron and George Osborne are two of the biggest wankers on the planet who would piss on a poor man when he was on fire because it's funny, then promptly set them back on fire again before privatising the fire and selling it to a rich mate who ultimately sends the grieving family a bill for said fire. But do you know why they get elected? Because they're not stupid when it comes to public image. They know that if they were to shout "feck the proles" they wouldn't stand a chance in the next election, so they keep their mouths shut.
Labour's problem with Ed was that they were too weak and too quiet. As soon as the Tories started with their "the mess we inherited" and talking up their own economic competence the Labour Party should have been all over that shit trying to put the record straight. They should have held up the increasing debt under Osborne and called him a fecking liar, but they didn't say anything because they were too afraid to even mention the economy. Instead the played the safe game and only talked about thing that the polls said they looked strong on already and it killed them. Now they've gone to a completely different extreme and I'm worried that it's going to end much in the same way that it did for Ed. They need to find the balance between tackling the issues and keeping their personal opinions to a minimum.
* I'm a Guardian poster so I can confirm that we are a bunch of preachy wankers.
We all know that David Cameron and George Osborne are two of the biggest wankers on the planet who would piss on a poor man when he was on fire because it's funny, then promptly set them back on fire again before privatising the fire and selling it to a rich mate who ultimately sends the grieving family a bill for said fire. But do you know why they get elected? Because they're not stupid when it comes to public image. They know that if they were to shout "feck the proles" they wouldn't stand a chance in the next election, so they keep their mouths shut.
Labour's problem with Ed was that they were too weak and too quiet. As soon as the Tories started with their "the mess we inherited" and talking up their own economic competence the Labour Party should have been all over that shit trying to put the record straight. They should have held up the increasing debt under Osborne and called him a fecking liar, but they didn't say anything because they were too afraid to even mention the economy. Instead the played the safe game and only talked about thing that the polls said they looked strong on already and it killed them. Now they've gone to a completely different extreme and I'm worried that it's going to end much in the same way that it did for Ed. They need to find the balance between tackling the issues and keeping their personal opinions to a minimum.
* I'm a Guardian poster so I can confirm that we are a bunch of preachy wankers.