The Labour Thread

[Abertawe]

I voted remain in June, voted Labour in 2015 and have never voted for a right of centre or right wing party in my life comrade.

I was speaking to JT.

Didn't you back Owen Smith? That's right.

 

[Vanni]

I voted remain in June, voted Labour in 2015 and have never voted for a right of centre or right wing party in my life comrade.

Well done Sir.

 

[TheMinsterman]

I'm a life long Liberal Democrat, voted Remain and in favour of vote reform and a York City fan so you could say I am a bit of an expert in failure.

Corbyn could win if his party stopped being children and exentuated his positives and appealing qualities cos the press won't.

 

[.V.]

I was speaking to JT.

Didn't you back Owen Smith? That's right.

That's not saying much, I'd back a wooden rocking horse at this point.

 

[Abertawe]

That's not saying much, I'd back a wooden rocking horse at this point.

Yet you can't explain why other than ''he doesn't connect with the media"

No true lefty or person of socialist leanings would wet themselves at the prospect of Corbyn's demise yet you do so at any given opportunity. Like Max I do question if you're a true Labour man. Both views better correlate with liberal conservatism whether you're prepared to admit it or not..

 

[.V.]

Yet you can't explain why other than ''he doesn't connect with the media"

No true lefty or person of socialist leanings would wet themselves at the prospect of Corbyn's demise yet you do so at any given opportunity. Like Max I do question if you're a true Labour man. Both views better correlate with liberal conservatism whether you're prepared to admit it or not..

I've not said that, I've said he doesn't connect with voters, in part because of the hostile media, but mainly because his PR is flat out bad.

Because Momentum, Labour members or JC is not in step with the country. Consequently I will take a more central Labour Party over the current shower of shit government we have. Political realism has driven me to a lesser of two evils conclusion.

 

[Abertawe]

I've not said that, I've said he doesn't connect with voters, in part because of the hostile media, but mainly because his PR is flat out bad.

Because Momentum, Labour members or JC is not in step with the country. Consequently I will take a more central Labour Party over the current shower of shit government we have. Political realism has driven me to a lesser of two evils conclusion.

There is no such thing as a central Labour Party. You either work in the interests of the populace or corporations, there is no middle ground on this. Before the current leadership basic things like nationalised public transport, anti austerity, free education and the like wasn't even on the agenda. Salary pay cap ratios of CEO's is now being talked about, unthinkable a couple of years ago.

There isn't any tantamount evidence for your assertion Corbyn doesn't connect with voters. Should Labour lose Copeland & Stoke then you'll have a massive case but there simply isn't any evidence that stands up to scrutiny one way or the other at this stage.

As for PR, call me Dave.

 

[johnnytodd]

How anyone can support a man with so many terrorist sympathies is beyond me.

The man couldn't even sing the national Anthem at a War memorial.

All the tories have to do is play that video every 4 years and Labour lose.

Simple.

 

[smat]

How anyone can support a man with so many terrorist sympathies is beyond me.

The man couldn't even sing the national Anthem at a War memorial.

All the tories have to do is play that video every 4 years and Labour lose.

Simple.

He's a Gooner though.

 

[Abertawe]

How anyone can support a man with so many terrorist sympathies is beyond me.

The man couldn't even sing the national Anthem at a War memorial.

All the tories have to do is play that video every 4 years and Labour lose.

Simple.

We ally with Saudi and then you got this www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/tony-blair/7974861/Tony-Blair-I-liked-Gerry-Adams-and-Martin-McGuinness-more-than-I-should.html

 

[johnnytodd]

We ally with Saudi and then you got this www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/tony-blair/7974861/Tony-Blair-I-liked-Gerry-Adams-and-Martin-McGuinness-more-than-I-should.html

Post what you want Aber but that's how people vote. If you ally with people who the population are threatened by or have harmed our population or forces and you lose.

The intellectual people don't decide an election they try too but as they say a picture is worth more than a thousands words.

Lose the terrorist sympathising leftie and you may have a chance in a decade or so.

 

[sl1k]

So many labels and 'identities' in politics, it puts me off discussing it.

I'd like to think we're a bit more fluid than that - not like pre-programmed robots.

 

[.V.]

There is no such thing as a central Labour Party. You either work in the interests of the populace or corporations, there is no middle ground on this. Before the current leadership basic things like nationalised public transport, anti austerity, free education and the like wasn't even on the agenda. Salary pay cap ratios of CEO's is now being talked about, unthinkable a couple of years ago.

There isn't any tantamount evidence for your assertion Corbyn doesn't connect with voters. Should Labour lose Copeland & Stoke then you'll have a massive case but there simply isn't any evidence that stands up to scrutiny one way or the other at this stage.

As for PR, call me Dave.

Of course there is, members of parties are not wedded to all of their ideology, they tend to be big tents which cover a spectrum of people. You may not like it but that was the Labour Party in power from 1997 to 2010, a more central Labour Party, but still.

Show me the evidence that Corbyn does connect with the electorate. I've shown you numerous polls showing he doesn't, now you prove to me that he does.

Hunt won in 2010 with a majority of 5,000 odd, with a turnout under 50% in a cinstituency which voted for Brexit by 70%. It's a seat they should hold, and I think they will, but with a majority under 500. Would that be a good or bad result for Labour?

 

[Aber gas]

Of course there is, members of parties are not wedded to all of their ideology, they tend to be big tents which cover a spectrum of people. You may not like it but that was the Labour Party in power from 1997 to 2010, a more central Labour Party, but still.

Show me the evidence that Corbyn does connect with the electorate. I've shown you numerous polls showing he doesn't, now you prove to me that he does.

Hunt won in 2010 with a majority of 5,000 odd, with a turnout under 50% in a cinstituency which voted for Brexit by 70%. It's a seat they should hold, and I think they will, but with a majority under 500. Would that be a good or bad result for Labour?

You're right, it is a big tent which is how I came to hold my nose with Blair and Brown. It seems that the right of the party can't do the same. The vitriol and spite directed at Corbyn and his support by "hurt" liberals could and should be directed at Tories and UKIP but for whatever reason it's easier to tut, roll your eyes and attack the best short term hope for the left in this country.
Sad times and my only hope is when the time comes people like yourself suck it up and get behind what's happening.

 

[Aber gas]

Of course there is, members of parties are not wedded to all of their ideology, they tend to be big tents which cover a spectrum of people. You may not like it but that was the Labour Party in power from 1997 to 2010, a more central Labour Party, but still.

Show me the evidence that Corbyn does connect with the electorate. I've shown you numerous polls showing he doesn't, now you prove to me that he does.

Hunt won in 2010 with a majority of 5,000 odd, with a turnout under 50% in a cinstituency which voted for Brexit by 70%. It's a seat they should hold, and I think they will, but with a majority under 500. Would that be a good or bad result for Labour?

I reckon Labour will increase its share in both Copeland and Stoke. Tenner?

 

[Abertawe]

Of course there is, members of parties are not wedded to all of their ideology, they tend to be big tents which cover a spectrum of people. You may not like it but that was the Labour Party in power from 1997 to 2010, a more central Labour Party, but still.

Show me the evidence that Corbyn does connect with the electorate. I've shown you numerous polls showing he doesn't, now you prove to me that he does.

Hunt won in 2010 with a majority of 5,000 odd, with a turnout under 50% in a cinstituency which voted for Brexit by 70%. It's a seat they should hold, and I think they will, but with a majority under 500. Would that be a good or bad result for Labour?

I don't believe there is any available evidence to prove or disprove either way. Opinion polls are just that, it's not factual evidence. I've not specifically counted but a quick gander shows Ed Miliband was ahead in the polls more often than not. According to your logic that would imply Ed connected with the electorate which in my opinion is just a preposterous suggestion. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_for_the_2015_United_Kingdom_general_election#2014)

If you are what you claim to be then get behind the party instead of this self fulfilling prophecy you're engaging on. The naysayers have a continual theme, I agree with the policies but I don't think Corbyn is the man to lead the party. Which is just the exact opposite to what the rationale should be. If those people voted for what they profess to believe in it'll be a landslide.

As for margins, in this political climate a win is a win.

 

[.V.]

You're right, it is a big tent which is how I came to hold my nose with Blair and Brown. It seems that the right of the party can't do the same. The vitriol and spite directed at Corbyn and his support by "hurt" liberals could and should be directed at Tories and UKIP but for whatever reason it's easier to tut, roll your eyes and attack the best short term hope for the left in this country.
Sad times and my only hope is when the time comes people like yourself suck it up and get behind what's happening.

I'm no hurt liberal though, I agree with a lot of his policies, but there's no evidence that he's connecting with the electorate. This government is fucking useless, and yet JC and Labour appear unable to hold them to account.

 

[Abertawe]

I'm no hurt liberal though, I agree with a lot of his policies, but there's no evidence that he's connecting with the electorate. This government is fucking useless, and yet JC and Labour appear unable to hold them to account.

Did Ed Miliband connect with the electorate seeing as he quite often enjoyed a lead in the polls?

 

[.V.]

I don't believe there is any available evidence to prove or disprove either way. Opinion polls are just that, it's not factual evidence. I've not specifically counted but a quick gander shows Ed Miliband was ahead in the polls more often than not. According to your logic that would imply Ed connected with the electorate which in my opinion is just a preposterous suggestion. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_for_the_2015_United_Kingdom_general_election#2014)

If you are what you claim to be then get behind the party instead of this self fulfilling prophecy you're engaging on. The naysayers have a continual theme, I agree with the policies but I don't think Corbyn is the man to lead the party. Which is just the exact opposite to what the rationale should be. If those people voted for what they profess to believe in it'll be a landslide.

As for margins, in this political climate a win is a win.

So you can't prove that he is popular with the electorate then? Despite what you might think of polling, i can support my point of view with the best evidence avalible to us.

Although EM's personal polling was not great, he wasn't a terrible opposition leader (not that i'm saying that was a great one either mind), and able to apply pressure to the co-alition on Syria and the phone hacking scandle at least. On top of that Labour were often in touching distance of the Tories for those 5 years, certainly not behind by double digit figures like they are now. Although he wasn't that popular he was able to make the party more attractive to the electorate whilst leader, more so than Corbyn anyway.

 

[Abertawe]

So you can't prove that he is popular with the electorate then? Despite what you might think of polling, i can support my point of view with the best evidence avalible to us.

Although EM's personal polling was not great, he wasn't a terrible opposition leader (not that i'm saying that was a great one either mind), and able to apply pressure to the co-alition on Syria and the phone hacking scandle at least. On top of that Labour were often in touching distance of the Tories for those 5 years, certainly not behind by double digit figures like they are now. Although he wasn't that popular he was able to make the party more attractive to the electorate whilst leader, more so than Corbyn anyway.

My question was do you believe Ed Miliband resonated with the electorate? Under him Labour were ahead of Cons more often than not so he was doing well on the polling front so I'm inquisitive as to whether you believe he was popular.

 

[.V.]

My question was do you believe Ed Miliband resonated with the electorate? Under him Labour were ahead of Cons more often than not so he was doing well on the polling front so I'm inquisitive as to whether you believe he was popular.

He was not, but he led the party better and this was reflected in the parties polling figures.

My question to you, if there is no evidence to suggest Corbyn is popular outside of Labour members, why the belief that he is?

 

[Abertawe]

He was not, but he led the party better and this was reflected in the parties polling figures.

My question to you, if there is no evidence to suggest Corbyn is popular outside of Labour members, why the belief that he is?

Okay, thank you for answering. If you believe he ran the party better then that is your subjective of which I have no right to deride. What we can objectify however is that Ed Miliband lead Labour to losing twenty-six seats in a general election which for the challenging party is disastrous. Even William Hague managed one gain when leading Conservatives as the challenging party for the first time in twenty-three years back in 2001. The subjective opinion polling which had Labour leading more often than not in the years running up to election didn't tally with the objective reality that came to be.

You're asking me a subjective question and expecting an objectified evidence based answer. Let's be clear. There is no objective evidence to prove Corbyn is unpopular with the electorate nor is there a way to prove he is. Your projections are based from opinion polling as is evident by your daily updates. There's nothing wrong with that if that's what you wish to do however it would be wise to acknowledge the contradictions that the objective reality produced in recent elections. We've highlighted how Ed's good polling translated into losing twenty-six seats. Nick Clegg led the Lib Dem SURGE into beating both conservatives & labour in the opinion polling which was unheard of yet they lost five seats

In answer to your question I'll start off by saying I don't believe Corbyn is disliked on a personal level. Whenever criticism is leveled against him it's always "nice guy, I actually quite admire him but..."
I know not being disliked for the person you are doesn't translate into being popular but it gives you a good grounding. Corbyn doesn't actually need to be popular until there is an election. My opinion that he can win is based on my personal belief that an election is won in the final two weeks. When the time comes for the televised debates he will decimate May on policy for all the nation to see. She is not going to stand up to the scrutiny and then counter the alternative put forward by Corbyn when he's in campaign mode. Corbyn the campaigner is a very different beast and when the general public engage in their two week interest of politics he will resonate with voters on both policy & personality.

Corbyn doesn't need to be popular now. He could be polling at -100 and it wouldn't have any great significance to an election over three years and a Brexit (or at least article 50) away. He only needs to be popular for two weeks and I believe that against such feeble opponents like May & Farron he will be.

 

[johnnytodd]

Okay, thank you for answering. If you believe he ran the party better then that is your subjective of which I have no right to deride. What we can objectify however is that Ed Miliband lead Labour to losing twenty-six seats in a general election which for the challenging party is disastrous. Even William Hague managed one gain when leading Conservatives as the challenging party for the first time in twenty-three years back in 2001. The subjective opinion polling which had Labour leading more often than not in the years running up to election didn't tally with the objective reality that came to be.

You're asking me a subjective question and expecting an objectified evidence based answer. Let's be clear. There is no objective evidence to prove Corbyn is unpopular with the electorate nor is there a way to prove he is. Your projections are based from opinion polling as is evident by your daily updates. There's nothing wrong with that if that's what you wish to do however it would be wise to acknowledge the contradictions that the objective reality produced in recent elections. We've highlighted how Ed's good polling translated into losing twenty-six seats. Nick Clegg led the Lib Dem SURGE into beating both conservatives & labour in the opinion polling which was unheard of yet they lost five seats

In answer to your question I'll start off by saying I don't believe Corbyn is disliked on a personal level. Whenever criticism is leveled against him it's always "nice guy, I actually quite admire him but..."
I know not being disliked for the person you are doesn't translate into being popular but it gives you a good grounding. Corbyn doesn't actually need to be popular until there is an election. My opinion that he can win is based on my personal belief that an election is won in the final two weeks. When the time comes for the televised debates he will decimate May on policy for all the nation to see. She is not going to stand up to the scrutiny and then counter the alternative put forward by Corbyn when he's in campaign mode. Corbyn the campaigner is a very different beast and when the general public engage in their two week interest of politics he will resonate with voters on both policy & personality.

Corbyn doesn't need to be popular now. He could be polling at -100 and it wouldn't have any great significance to an election over three years and a Brexit (or at least article 50) away. He only needs to be popular for two weeks and I believe that against such feeble opponents like May & Farron he will be.

lolzzzzzz

 

[mnb089mnb]

Your imagination knows no bounds. Concentrate on yourself instead of what I think. You got 2016 so utterly wrong it's a wonder you have the nerve to comment further.

If predicting football outcomes poorly were a crime this website would be closed down in minutes. I'm not sure that's the same as voting for the losing side in a referendum either.

The fool even said Wales wouldn't make it out the groups. Know nothing fake welsh person.

Why am I a fake welsh (sic) person?

 

[Aber gas]

Corbyn unveils policy on NHS. We need to back him.
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-new...3767?service=responsive#ICID=sharebar_twitter

 

[.V.]

Okay, thank you for answering. If you believe he ran the party better then that is your subjective of which I have no right to deride. What we can objectify however is that Ed Miliband lead Labour to losing twenty-six seats in a general election which for the challenging party is disastrous. Even William Hague managed one gain when leading Conservatives as the challenging party for the first time in twenty-three years back in 2001. The subjective opinion polling which had Labour leading more often than not in the years running up to election didn't tally with the objective reality that came to be.

You're asking me a subjective question and expecting an objectified evidence based answer. Let's be clear. There is no objective evidence to prove Corbyn is unpopular with the electorate nor is there a way to prove he is. Your projections are based from opinion polling as is evident by your daily updates. There's nothing wrong with that if that's what you wish to do however it would be wise to acknowledge the contradictions that the objective reality produced in recent elections. We've highlighted how Ed's good polling translated into losing twenty-six seats. Nick Clegg led the Lib Dem SURGE into beating both conservatives & labour in the opinion polling which was unheard of yet they lost five seats

In answer to your question I'll start off by saying I don't believe Corbyn is disliked on a personal level. Whenever criticism is leveled against him it's always "nice guy, I actually quite admire him but..."
I know not being disliked for the person you are doesn't translate into being popular but it gives you a good grounding. Corbyn doesn't actually need to be popular until there is an election. My opinion that he can win is based on my personal belief that an election is won in the final two weeks. When the time comes for the televised debates he will decimate May on policy for all the nation to see. She is not going to stand up to the scrutiny and then counter the alternative put forward by Corbyn when he's in campaign mode. Corbyn the campaigner is a very different beast and when the general public engage in their two week interest of politics he will resonate with voters on both policy & personality.

Corbyn doesn't need to be popular now. He could be polling at -100 and it wouldn't have any great significance to an election over three years and a Brexit (or at least article 50) away. He only needs to be popular for two weeks and I believe that against such feeble opponents like May & Farron he will be.

You're quite right that the 2015 election was disastrous for Labour, and the polls proved incorrect, but polls have typically been more optimistic for Labour, and less so for the Conservatives. Ie not taking into account shy Tories etc. And not for the first time either, i still remember waking up in shock in 1992 to see John Major win a majority.

We'll have to agree to disagree on polling then, because like or not, it's the closest objective measure we have until a general election, and they are useful long term tools for showing trends IMO.

I agree with you on that to some extent. I don't think he has a nice guy problem on the whole, but i do think he struggles with being seen as competent and as the next leader of this country, and these things do matters to voters, and rightly so. He also struggles on the issue of defence, and i don't see how that can be rectified given his stance on nuclear weapons and past statements regarding the IRA. He has been misquoted in the past, but has to do a better job at rebutting. He has got better at PMQs but i'm not convinced that he'll get the best of May in leadership debates, and he'll also have to engage with news organisations he doesn't like, like it or not. If Corbyn the campaigner is better, then he needs to be in that mood now.

I think he does need to make inroads otherwise it'll dictate the narrative of the election and demoralise his base.

 

[.V.]

Corbyn unveils policy on NHS. We need to back him.
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-new...3767?service=responsive#ICID=sharebar_twitter

Sensible ideas that i can get behind certainly. But it is an article from August, and i can't recall him saying anything similar recently, despite the crisis in the NHS. I'm happy to be proved wrong.

The problem Labour will face, regardless of who is leader, is how will they pay for it; how they will pay for anything. Economic competency matters, so i hope they've got their sums right for the next election, in order to counter any Tory claims.

 

[Aber gas]

Sensible ideas that i can get behind certainly. But it is an article from August, and i can't recall him saying anything similar recently, despite the crisis in the NHS. I'm happy to be proved wrong.

The problem Labour will face, regardless of who is leader, is how will they pay for it; how they will pay for anything. Economic competency matters, so i hope they've got their sums right for the next election, in order to counter any Tory claims.

Does it matter anymore? People swallowed this austerity nonsense despite it having a negative effect on the economy and no effect at all on the national debt.

 

[.V.]

Does it matter anymore? People swallowed this austerity nonsense despite it having a negative effect on the economy and no effect at all on the national debt.

I think so. The Tories will keep punching away at the wound until Labour can counter it effectively.

 

[Aber gas]

I think so. The Tories will keep punching away at the wound until Labour can counter it effectively.

In that case we go after the big ones. Corporation tax, a proper progressive tax system, hammer tax evaders, invest in our industry ( actually make stuff). Save money by doing away with the corporate leachs that siphon money away from our public services and by extension our pockets.
As the enemy becomes ever more ridiculous in their lies and bluster so must we become more confident and straightforward in our ideas and policy.