That the country as a whole doesn't want a broadly leftwing program. This is why the Labour party moved right in the first place, all their research through focus groups and private polling said they had to if they wanted the votes to win. They didn't do it to be bellends.
next labour leader
- Thread starter sun_tzu
- Start date
It's incredibly lazy is what it is. Part of the narrative I have seen in the media is that Miliband apparently lost because he was 'too far to the left' and having Corbyn who is 'further to the left' means he cannot win at all. It is ludicrous frankly, there's far more and bigger reasons why Miliband lost, maybe most of all because he's absolutely characterless, represents nothing but a cliche politician with no clue about the real world and in no way relates to 95% of the population, not least the types who vote Labour.
This 'academic research' is a typical way of trying to rationalise and 'work out' why and how people voted. It is not feasible to come up with tangible black and white reasons with such a complex issue and simplify it even further still with some 'left and right' silly bollocks scale that really means nothing at all, typical media rubbish.
Except it's been used to identify and win over key voter groups in key voting areas in countries all over the world for decades, delivering election wins. If we're starting to deny actual evidence now, we really are entering the twilight zone for the Labour party.
It's educated guessing and polling with made up substance in between.
It's worth noting Corbyn is hardly Tspiras or Pablo Inglasias. He's just an authentic chap and an alright speaker. He's not overly charismatic and certainly aint trendy. His policies alone are what people have gotten behind... Imagine if he was a younger, good looking, natural orator!
Perhaps people have got wise to that - how politicians looked never used to matter at all. It's a recent phenomenon (and an unfortunate one, IMO).
It's definitely unfortunate. Wasn't Michael Foot's image a problem back in the day?
It was. He never recovered from the Cenotaph incident - he wore a kind of green duffel coat to the Remembrance Day service in London one year, when all the other party leaders were wearing black coats. He was absolutely slated for that and the coat was referred to as a 'donkey jacket', this scoring more political points. In reality, he was a brilliant and compassionate man, and I always loved him because he was the spitting image of my dad.
Loved Michael Foot. A true Labour man.
If he's talking about nationalising energy companies then presumably he'd gun for E.On? Would he really renationalise Royal Mail? Am sure most people on the political spectrum would agree with the railways being nationalised. The UK did expropriate Railtrack back in the day if you remember, so we have a bit of form there.
And why are you so sure nationalisation policies would make him unelectable? Even a majority of Tory voters have expressed support for nationalising the energy and railway companies. Let's have another butchers.
The DM is combusting over Corbyn...
Jeremy Corbyn DEFENDS a controversial vicar who was banned from social media for sharing 'clearly anti-Semitic' material blaming Israel for 9/11 attacks
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...-promoting-clearly-anti-Semitic-material.html
Jeremy Corbyn DEFENDS a controversial vicar who was banned from social media for sharing 'clearly anti-Semitic' material blaming Israel for 9/11 attacks
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...-promoting-clearly-anti-Semitic-material.html
Some here have questioned why Corbyn would struggle to be elected, well this Newsnight interview from June contains a few damaging undertones IMO:
Let's run through some of Jeremy's analysis for why Labour didn't triumph in May:
Racist
Confused
The electorate don't understand what they are voting for.
Bear in mind that his object as leader will be to win back some of those people he is denigrating.
I also thought his answer to the question on the Royal Family was informative: some might argue that it was a poor attempt at humour, yet i reckon it is equally possible to interet his glib reply as patronising or dismissive. Is "stolid and honest Jeremy" but a veneer, should it rather be Corbyn the Conceited?
You can be assured that his opponents will turn those words against him in jsut such a manner, and with a degree of justification.
Corbyn is probably a diligent and loyal constituency MP, as well as a valuable campaigner for unfashionable yet important issues, however i would serious doubts as to his suitability for Prime Minister.
It so happens that Norway was the one Scandinavian country not to feature on our cruise. Although there are some Baltic cruises which stop at Oslo, the Fjords are typically set aside for their very own specific cruise. Of the places we visited i think we came away from Finland and Germany with the most positive impression, with honourable mentions for Sweden and Denmark.
Mauritius huh? Not a place i have any experience of myself, although my sister and her fiance was considering it as a possible honeymoon destination.
Let's run through some of Jeremy's analysis for why Labour didn't triumph in May:
Racist
Confused
The electorate don't understand what they are voting for.
Bear in mind that his object as leader will be to win back some of those people he is denigrating.
I also thought his answer to the question on the Royal Family was informative: some might argue that it was a poor attempt at humour, yet i reckon it is equally possible to interet his glib reply as patronising or dismissive. Is "stolid and honest Jeremy" but a veneer, should it rather be Corbyn the Conceited?
You can be assured that his opponents will turn those words against him in jsut such a manner, and with a degree of justification.
Corbyn is probably a diligent and loyal constituency MP, as well as a valuable campaigner for unfashionable yet important issues, however i would serious doubts as to his suitability for Prime Minister.
It so happens that Norway was the one Scandinavian country not to feature on our cruise. Although there are some Baltic cruises which stop at Oslo, the Fjords are typically set aside for their very own specific cruise. Of the places we visited i think we came away from Finland and Germany with the most positive impression, with honourable mentions for Sweden and Denmark.
Mauritius huh? Not a place i have any experience of myself, although my sister and her fiance was considering it as a possible honeymoon destination.
Last edited:
Interesting on Corbyn- he is oddly gaining traction though. The right wing press leapt on the clause 4 stuff, but it doesn't seem to have damaged him. As I said earlier, a lot of people agree that the railways should be nationalised, even my hard right missus, although she scoffed at the idea of nationalising energy companies and the Royal Mail.
NEXT LABOUR PARTY LEADER
Jeremy Corbyn
5/4
Andy Burnham
6/4
Yvette Cooper
11/4
Liz Kendall
80/1
Can't believe I spelt Mauritius wrong! Typing on a phone is lethal. If your sister wants any tips on hotels in Mauritius give me a shout- the wife is very proud of her country and is adamant that there is one coast you want to avoid. I loved Le Touesserok when we went one time, but that was about a decade ago and I'm, told it is dated now by younger folk.
The Scandis are a strange bunch. I have a Swedish friend whose family has a holiday home in Finland- he hates the place but loves the fishing and the pics he takes are lovely. I've only ever visited Copenhagen (which I felt was expensive and so-and-so for a European capital) and then a day trip from there to Lund in Sweden, which was a lovely town. Am a big fan of Germany. My missus isn't keen on more northerly European states given she moans enough about our weather...Was boiling in Vienna last month though.
Last edited:
We should definitely renationalise energy and the royal mail. The mail was actually making a profit before the tories sold it off, there was literally no need.
That's our short-termist politics for you and why democracy is so flawed. How the hell are you going to nationalise energy barring paying through the nose for the big six, many of which are foreign-owned? Comes back to my expropriation point. The energy companies make a profit, but their tariff increases are strictly inflation-linked. It is one of the most heavily regulated industries going and not something you'd invest in. It is a myth that all things privatised go swimmingly. The company behind City Airport went bust and Railtrack was expropriated. Qinetiq, which was spun out of the MOD, amid much criticism, is still trading below its float price. People forget that the government completely fleeced the telecoms industry on 3G licences. It can work both ways.
I know, I also know that despite the sky rocketing of prices the railway industry is probably better off private than nationalised. Besides the national grid and water should definitely be nationalised, private companies eehh not so much.
What about the pensions and investments tied up in energy companies? Corbyn's policy portfolio, at least what i know of it, has too many conflicting aims i feel. His idea of costing leaves a lot to be desired too, i mean here he is making all of these pledges on policy but how many will stand up to scrutiny?
For those who live in sizeable urban centres the Royal Mail isn't without its competition for mail.parcel delivery. And if one were to draw a comparison between the quality of service provided in 2010s versus that of the 1990s, the conclusion would be unfavourable. Rural and island communities ought to be treated as a separate case mark you.
My opinion on re-nationalisation has a lot to do with the particular sector in involved, whilst i might look upon a takeover of the water market with some favour, government doesn't have a good enough record to be making a habit of the practice. Be it the rail network or energy, i think the state can be of best use in covering those areas which companies will not (recent state-operated franchises have had their have hardly been paragons). Government can be of most use in driving change, it is therefore dispiriting to see the Tories turning their backs on subsidies for accessible renewables.
You have no need to remark upon typos around me, my track record is rather appalling in that quarter. I don't know how likely Mauritius remains at this point, it was part of a safari Mauritius combo IIRC. Not including the hunting of Cecils' children or other animals associated with the Lion King.
We were very fortunate with the weather during our day in Finland, and the shore excursion we chose allowed us to see some of the countryside local to Helsinki which appealed to us. Although i was happy enough with what i learnt about medieval and renaissance Germany, their policy of charging you 70 cents to go to the toilet (at least in service stations) came across as blatant profiteering to me. lol Being a committed CEer, i couldn't help noticing how nostalgic our Russian guide in Saint Petersburg was about the Soviet era, a sentiment quite lacking in Estonia and Germany.
Last edited:
Good griefz...
Liz Kendall profile: "I don’t want to protest. I want to get into power":
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/aug/10/liz-kendall-profile-power-labour-leadership-election
Liz Kendall profile: "I don’t want to protest. I want to get into power":
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/aug/10/liz-kendall-profile-power-labour-leadership-election
I wouldn't renationalise the energy companies but I would invest in state-owned renewables whilst also implementing a carbon tax.
Our own Richard Leese has his two pennies worth
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/aug/10/yvette-cooper-labour-leadership-manchester
So does the original mr sweary
http://www.alastaircampbell.org/blo...one-but-corbyn-labour-is-finished-if-he-wins/
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/aug/10/yvette-cooper-labour-leadership-manchester
So does the original mr sweary
http://www.alastaircampbell.org/blo...one-but-corbyn-labour-is-finished-if-he-wins/
The Tory lite are worried. MP Barry Sheerman wants the contest to be paused.
Can people please stop saying this, it's insulting shite.
We already have some carbon taxes in place though. Not sure the government will invest in the infrastructure needed to develop its own renewables- guess it's more likely to incentivise the incumbents to do it.
Fair point on pensions. Shell and BP alone account for 8.4% of the FTSE 100 and and the wider oil & gas sector is 13.25%. That's a big hit for anyone in a tracker fund. In reality though, I guess as major global companies, only a fraction of Shell and BP's oil fields are in UK territory.
http://www.ftse.com/Analytics/FactSheets/temp/7b169136-5b67-4289-bb60-6256d1be7c09.pdf
The potential compensation claims for that plus ones arising from ripping up the train operators' contracts would be very high though, assuming Corbyn wouldn't just tell them to get lost. That wouldn't exactly help his relationship with business.
Not so worried about the post service and I guess you should view our rail network as a public service rather than a profit centre, particularly given its creaking Victorian infrastructure. I can barely remember British Rail to be honest.
The rail infrastructure is managed by network rail
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Network_Rail
Network Rail is state owned... Its the operating franchises that are private
Just like the transmissions network is owned by national grid and private companies manage the end user delivery experience
Please note that both the grid and the rail network have suffered from chronic underinvestment under both blue and red governments whilst being public assets
So much for this public ownership myth...
Energy, the Royal Mail, the railways, the bus companies and every other utility and universally-used service that used to be under public ownership, in my view.
Completely agree. The whole free market does it better is true but only when it comes to non-monopolies.
Royal Mail for one has gone to trash. Up to five days for second class FFS. I asked them to repeat that when they told me the other week.
I was just watching Dateline London, and one of their panellists for this week put the cost of nationalising the energy sector at just shy of £150bn.
Times YouGov poll showing Corbyn winning the ballot in the first round, 53% to 21% for Burnham in second. This will get messy.
He's absolutely mullering them all.
I really hope Corbyn wins, it's the first time I've been optimistic about politics in years.
Those who support Corbyn are the looney left, those who'd prefer Kendall are Tory light. Hopeless dreamers versus spineless compromisers. It's hyperbole but it's all based in truth.
Last edited:
Corbyn was fancied considerably more than that, a little while back (shortly after the first polls that put him ahead). Then Burnham took a brief lead. Looks to be steadying on the idea they've about the same chance.
EDIT - It would've been an idea to check the odds again, before posting. Corbyn's now miles ahead with the punters.
Current odds of all major bookmakers:
Jeremy Corbyn: 8/13, 1/2, 8/13, 3/5, 2/5, 8/11, 7/10, 1/2, 4/6, 4/5, 7/10, 1/2, 7/10, 7/10, 4/6, 4/7.
Andy Burnham: 5/2, 5/2, 11/5, 11/5, 11/4, 15/8, 7/5, 3/1, 9/4, 13/8, 11/5, 2/1, 11/5, 7/5, 7/5, 11/4.
Best price on Corbyn is 4/5, best on Burnham is 3/1. I hope those odds have a firm basis in probability.
Jeremy Corbyn: 8/13, 1/2, 8/13, 3/5, 2/5, 8/11, 7/10, 1/2, 4/6, 4/5, 7/10, 1/2, 7/10, 7/10, 4/6, 4/7.
Andy Burnham: 5/2, 5/2, 11/5, 11/5, 11/4, 15/8, 7/5, 3/1, 9/4, 13/8, 11/5, 2/1, 11/5, 7/5, 7/5, 11/4.
Best price on Corbyn is 4/5, best on Burnham is 3/1. I hope those odds have a firm basis in probability.
Them's the ones. I was too lazy for copy and pasting. I praise your post-midnight energy levels.
One of your team has started already, veritably frothing at the mouth with tactics for how to smash democracy in the Labour Party.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/pol...assin-can-save-Labour-from-Jeremy-Corbyn.html
After the election, Labour thinking was that they had to find a way to better engage with three sections of the electorate:
- Labour supporters who turned to the SNP.
- The UKIP vote in the north.
- Aspirational middle Britain.
As matters stand presently, two-thirds of that list will
prove to be a difficult hunting ground for Corbyn.
Nicola Sturgeon already has her troops massed on Labour's hill, so how much progress can your Jeremy realistically make even if he does improve the party's image in Scotland? He's all but written off the UKIP bloc as a pack of racists, whilst holding to the view that high levels of immigration should be welcomed. What he intends for low-middle earners can perhaps be divined through the false promises alluded to in this leadership contest.
- Labour supporters who turned to the SNP.
- The UKIP vote in the north.
- Aspirational middle Britain.
As matters stand presently, two-thirds of that list will
prove to be a difficult hunting ground for Corbyn.
Nicola Sturgeon already has her troops massed on Labour's hill, so how much progress can your Jeremy realistically make even if he does improve the party's image in Scotland? He's all but written off the UKIP bloc as a pack of racists, whilst holding to the view that high levels of immigration should be welcomed. What he intends for low-middle earners can perhaps be divined through the false promises alluded to in this leadership contest.
Last edited:
I honestly think that Labour under Corbyn could make some decent inroads again in Scotland. He's exactly the type of figure they need. He's someone who's exactly what a lot of SNP voters would want - perceived as principled, and fairly anti-establishment. The fact that he's got the Tory party and a large portion of the Labour party ridiculing him already stands in his favour. That's the sort of thing a lot of SNP voters will eat up. I'm not definitely going to vote for Labour or anything if he gets in, but I'm definitely more likely to give it some consideration, and I've seen plenty of others in the same boat.
As for the other two, would Burnham or Cooper do much better? The UKIP vote in the North is, presumably, consisted of many who feel a bit alienated with Labour and much of what it stands for. Burnham or Cooper aren't going to win those voters back.
And for the aspirational middle Britain, would Burnham or Cooper have anywhere near enough to tempt them away from the Tories? Presumably middle Britain, in its more general terms, is happy with the government currently, and thus is unlikely to turn back to Labour unless they're offering something really good.
Corbyn probably won't win an election, but I feel like he's a lot more likely to give the Tories some decent opposition than the other two, who are probably safer choices but, in reality, stopgaps until Labour choose their next leader after a 2020 defeat.
If the SNP run the next Scottish election on a second referendum and win, what on earth does he do then?