Labour Party leadership election 2015
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 28, 2024, 08:28:17 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Other Elections - Analysis and Discussion
  International Elections (Moderators: afleitch, Hash)
  Labour Party leadership election 2015
« previous next »
Pages: 1 ... 39 40 41 42 43 [44] 45 46 47 48 49 ... 58
Author Topic: Labour Party leadership election 2015  (Read 138730 times)
Silent Hunter
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 9,306
United Kingdom


WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1075 on: September 02, 2015, 12:55:32 PM »

Besides there's no where else for Labour voters to go. The mortal wounding of the Lib Dems will do them a favour there.

If you're a white working class person, there's always UKIP.
Logged
Blair
Blair2015
Atlas Politician
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 11,816
United Kingdom


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1076 on: September 02, 2015, 02:41:04 PM »

It's awful to think that people don't have anywhere else to go, because frankly they will. It's that thinking that's lead Labour to collapse in Scotland.

On Corbyn I'll give him until the 2016 elections-if we poll less than the tories in Scotland and lose in London then we need to look at the leadership
Logged
You kip if you want to...
change08
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 8,940
United Kingdom
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1077 on: September 02, 2015, 03:10:32 PM »

People who don't have elsewhere to go just stay at home.
Logged
Phony Moderate
Obamaisdabest
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 12,298
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1078 on: September 03, 2015, 05:19:16 AM »

Once again, Blair expresses regret over an actual achievement of his government's.
Logged
Phony Moderate
Obamaisdabest
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 12,298
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1079 on: September 03, 2015, 09:01:04 AM »

Big move to Cooper in the betting markets in the past few hours and away from Corbyn and Burnham, though Corbyn is still firm favourite. A new poll out in the near future?
Logged
Blair
Blair2015
Atlas Politician
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 11,816
United Kingdom


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1080 on: September 03, 2015, 11:00:56 AM »

Big move to Cooper in the betting markets in the past few hours and away from Corbyn and Burnham, though Corbyn is still firm favourite. A new poll out in the near future?

Could be, or Voter ID from unions is showing low turnout for Corbyn. Her speech on migration has actually put her relatively in the news and got a lot of praise, along with the news night focus group. I have to admit Burnham has been drifting towards Kendall like levels of media activity lately.

As I've said before, and I doubt anyone cares but Cooper could have been my 1st if it didn't make Corbyn more likely to win. I'd eat my hat if somehow Corbyn comes third and it's a between Burnham and Cooper
Logged
Silent Hunter
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 9,306
United Kingdom


WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1081 on: September 03, 2015, 11:41:01 AM »

Could be something, could be nothing. However, I think this election has done serious damage to the party regardless of who wins - a lot of nasty things have been said in both camps and it won't be easy to mend the clear divisions.

Also, we're polling worse than we did at the General - and 5 years ago, we were at 37%.
Logged
Filuwaúrdjan
Realpolitik
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 67,609
United Kingdom


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1082 on: September 03, 2015, 12:54:13 PM »

That at least shouldn't be a serious concern: this parliament has five years to run and the Tories are due their own (doubtless spectacularly nasty) leadership contest of their own towards the end of it.
Logged
Blair
Blair2015
Atlas Politician
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 11,816
United Kingdom


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1083 on: September 04, 2015, 03:30:14 AM »

Our biggest concern was that poll that had us at 8% in the Scottish elections next year
Logged
Phony Moderate
Obamaisdabest
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 12,298
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1084 on: September 04, 2015, 07:04:27 AM »

Poll of 250 Labour councillors in marginal seats by the Labour History Research Unit:

Corbyn - 30.3% (+5.13%)
Cooper - 28.7% (-1.23%)
Burnham - 28.3% (-2.65%)
Kendall - 12.7% (-1.25%)

Changes are on the previous poll. Full details here: http://ww2.anglia.ac.uk/ruskin/en/home/microsites/labour_history_research/useful_links.Maincontent.0003.file.tmp/LHRU%20September%202015%20polling.pdf
Logged
Clyde1998
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,936
United Kingdom


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1085 on: September 04, 2015, 11:52:12 AM »

Our biggest concern was that poll that had us at 8% in the Scottish elections next year
What poll was that? I haven't seen Labour below 20%, tbh.
Logged
Phony Moderate
Obamaisdabest
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 12,298
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1086 on: September 04, 2015, 11:54:40 AM »

Corbyn's odds seem to have tightened again today.
Logged
Torie
Moderators
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 46,057
Ukraine


Political Matrix
E: -3.48, S: -4.70

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1087 on: September 04, 2015, 12:31:34 PM »


"Mr Blair said: "I did feel that we made a mistake on devolution. We should have understood that, when you change the system of government so that more power is devolved, you need to have ways of culturally keeping England, Scotland and Wales very much in sync with each other."

Blair fails to explain just what the "ways of culturally keeping England, Scotland and Wales very much in sync with each other" are. So the comment seems like wistful musing, rather than anything worthy of policy debate. even policy in hindsight debate. I don't buy the cultural divide bit much anyway. It's more like a political divide.
Logged
Blair
Blair2015
Atlas Politician
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 11,816
United Kingdom


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1088 on: September 04, 2015, 12:52:36 PM »

Our biggest concern was that poll that had us at 8% in the Scottish elections next year
What poll was that? I haven't seen Labour below 20%, tbh.

The poll has disappeared, Ruth Davidson and several blairites re-tweeted it-basically laughing at the fact that we're doing worse than the tories for probably the first time since well ages
Logged
Leftbehind
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3,639
United Kingdom


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1089 on: September 04, 2015, 01:38:56 PM »
« Edited: September 04, 2015, 01:52:29 PM by Acting like I'm Morrissey w/o the wit »

Hence when they summon up some faux outrage at how Corbynites are being "too indulgent" and overly-relaxed at the prospect of losing, we know what's really at play.

I was responding to the statement that the 60s was a better decade than the current one (which seems to have now been retracted, in fairness).

That the Wilson government fixed some of those things towards the end of the 60s is irrelevant to that claim.

Anyway, social policy aside, look at any decent metric of welfare and obviously people are better off now. Leftist radical nostalgia for poverty is annoying. I guess if you like poverty supporting Corbyn makes sense though.

There are some long term happiness studies showing that the 60s were the decade when most of Western Europe reached the level where higher material wealth stopped making us happier. Since then material progress has not made the average person feel better.

When you are poor increased material wealth makes you feel a lot better, but this effect decrease when you reach higher levels and at some point more stuff and better living conditions stop adding to most peoples feeling of satisfaction with life.

The nostalgia is also not completely unfounded: Society was a lot more safe and sustainable back then. Local communities functioned better, crime was lower, unemployment lower, outsourcing unheard of etc. Farming was closer to being organic, traffic congestion lower etc. At the same time it was a culturally much more vibrant and exciting era than today.

So as a decade it had an adequate level of material wealth for most people, was culturally interesting and a lot of social and economic changes since then have simply not benefitted ordinary people.
^ This, more or less exactly. Not to mention the fact that the people did actually have some kind of an influence and a choice at the moment, you know, democratically speaking. That's all over now, of course.

Honestly, I think Al's far closer to the actual cause - woolly notions of pollution and sentimentality overlooks that prospects for ordinary working-class Brits - particularly the young - things are far from "better off now". Decently paid, long-term secure jobs has made way for 'flexible', low-paid jobs thanks in large part to the shift to service sector economy (zero-hours up by 20% yipee!); union strength barely existent today; inflation in qualifications mean jobs in other sectors require qualifications that now come saddled with debt (up to 30K), pensions are, to put it lightly, not what they were and essentials like affordable housing & regulated rent are no longer a given. Last I seen, Britain's social mobility ranks amongst Eastern European levels - and it's notable, just look at the trend of working-class representation in parliament & other spheres, and I've even seen figures to suggest child poverty has risen since the 1960's.

Obviously ivory tower liberals have no idea, and so are to be found telling us, unconvincingly, we've never had it so good.

It would be more honest (in my opinion) if you had a moderate social democratic party and a separate Marxist socialist party. As explained above though the FPTP system means that the left are forced to accommodate each other within the same party which creates the endless tensions and even hatreds we're all familiar with.

The Anglosphere left has had the luxury of being able to travel right without risk of being severely punished by PR-enabled left splits. If you think the "social democratic moderates" would be rallying around Umunna & the cast of Blairites, whilst those unhappy shuffling off to Marxist rump, I think you've spectacularly underestimated the strength of dissatisfaction within Labour that the party has lost its way. Was it not Kinnock declaring he "had his party back" when Ed was elected?

Obviously I agree though, I said as much a few weeks back, I have little in common with the Blairite wing, and I doubt they do me.
Logged
politicus
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 10,174
Denmark


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1090 on: September 04, 2015, 01:53:09 PM »

Hence when they summon up some faux outrage at how Corbynites are being "too indulgent" and overly-relaxed at the prospect of losing, we know what's really at play.

I was responding to the statement that the 60s was a better decade than the current one (which seems to have now been retracted, in fairness).

That the Wilson government fixed some of those things towards the end of the 60s is irrelevant to that claim.

Anyway, social policy aside, look at any decent metric of welfare and obviously people are better off now. Leftist radical nostalgia for poverty is annoying. I guess if you like poverty supporting Corbyn makes sense though.

There are some long term happiness studies showing that the 60s were the decade when most of Western Europe reached the level where higher material wealth stopped making us happier. Since then material progress has not made the average person feel better.

When you are poor increased material wealth makes you feel a lot better, but this effect decrease when you reach higher levels and at some point more stuff and better living conditions stop adding to most peoples feeling of satisfaction with life.

The nostalgia is also not completely unfounded: Society was a lot more safe and sustainable back then. Local communities functioned better, crime was lower, unemployment lower, outsourcing unheard of etc. Farming was closer to being organic, traffic congestion lower etc. At the same time it was a culturally much more vibrant and exciting era than today.

So as a decade it had an adequate level of material wealth for most people, was culturally interesting and a lot of social and economic changes since then have simply not benefitted ordinary people.
^ This, more or less exactly. Not to mention the fact that the people did actually have some kind of an influence and a choice at the moment, you know, democratically speaking. That's all over now, of course.

Honestly, I think Al's far closer to the actual cause - woolly notions of pollution and sentimentality overlooks that prospects for ordinary working-class Brits - particularly the young - things are far from "better off now". Decently paid, long-term secure jobs has made way for 'flexible', low-paid jobs thanks in large part to the shift to service sector economy (zero-hours up by 20% yipee!); union strength barely existent today; inflation in qualifications mean jobs in other sectors require qualifications that now come saddled with debt (up to 30K), pensions are, to put it lightly, not what they were and essentials like affordable housing & regulated rent are no longer a given. Last I seen, Britain's social mobility ranks amongst Eastern European levels - and it's notable, just look at the trend of working-class representation in parliament & other spheres, and I've even seen figures to suggest child poverty has risen since the 1960's.

Obviously ivory tower liberals have no idea, and so are to be found telling us, unconvincingly, we've never had it so good.

While I mentioned sustainability I also included lower unemployment and no outsourcing etc. as factors, so you are making a caricature of my post.
Logged
Leftbehind
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3,639
United Kingdom


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1091 on: September 04, 2015, 02:04:48 PM »

lol sorry, I just meant to impress that there are enough aspects where things have tangibly worsened that we needn't look to some of the things you listed.
Logged
Phony Moderate
Obamaisdabest
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 12,298
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1092 on: September 04, 2015, 05:23:28 PM »

Our biggest concern was that poll that had us at 8% in the Scottish elections next year
What poll was that? I haven't seen Labour below 20%, tbh.

The poll has disappeared, Ruth Davidson and several blairites re-tweeted it-basically laughing at the fact that we're doing worse than the tories for probably the first time since well ages

Probably figures from a crosstab of a UK-wide poll.
Logged
Vega
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,253
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1093 on: September 04, 2015, 10:18:09 PM »


Should have given Scotland the same deal they were given in 1979.
Logged
Phony Moderate
Obamaisdabest
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 12,298
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1094 on: September 05, 2015, 03:15:15 PM »

The timetable for the special conference can be found at the bottom of this article: http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/sep/05/corbyn-supporters-mps-party-members-labour-election
Logged
Phony Moderate
Obamaisdabest
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 12,298
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1095 on: September 05, 2015, 04:51:56 PM »

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/sep/05/labour-liz-kendall-vote-for-yvette-cooper-get-jeremy-corbyn

Is it a case of former Corbyn supporters switching their first preferences to Burnham or a case of Burnham supporters viewing Corbyn as being more acceptable now? Or both?
Logged
Blair
Blair2015
Atlas Politician
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 11,816
United Kingdom


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1096 on: September 05, 2015, 05:05:58 PM »

Quote
You must be logged in to read this quote.

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/sep/05/labour-liz-kendall-vote-for-yvette-cooper-get-jeremy-corbyn

Is it a case of former Corbyn supporters switching their first preferences to Burnham or a case of Burnham supporters viewing Corbyn as being more acceptable now? Or both?

God knows, not sure if it's in there or the NS article but there's a claim that 50% of AB supporters are backing Corbyn as 2-that's way too high from what I've seen both phone banking and talking to people. Although Burnham's support is a cross between the soft left who agree with Corbyn, and people like me who are voting for him based on personality/electionability.

As Stephen Bush put it we're at the stage where only Andy Burnham can stop Corbyn in the last round but Burnham can't get get to the last round. He's had an bad last couple of weeks imo
Logged
Leftbehind
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3,639
United Kingdom


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1097 on: September 05, 2015, 05:40:49 PM »

Even if Burnham wasn't having a shocking campaign, he clearly isn't seen as an acceptable compromise for the right of the party.
Logged
politicus
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 10,174
Denmark


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1098 on: September 05, 2015, 05:42:46 PM »

Even if Burnham wasn't having a shocking campaign, he clearly isn't seen as an acceptable compromise for the right of the party.

That seems rather silly of them.
Logged
Phony Moderate
Obamaisdabest
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 12,298
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1099 on: September 05, 2015, 05:46:24 PM »

Even if Burnham wasn't having a shocking campaign, he clearly isn't seen as an acceptable compromise for the right of the party.

That seems rather silly of them.

Especially given that he is, you know, on the right of the party (though on the left of this leadership campaign).
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 39 40 41 42 43 [44] 45 46 47 48 49 ... 58  
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.055 seconds with 12 queries.