Labour Party leadership election 2015
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 28, 2024, 08:49:21 PM
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 ... 53 54 55 56 57 [58]
Author Topic: Labour Party leadership election 2015  (Read 138744 times)
ChrisDR68
PoshPaws68
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 395
United Kingdom
WWW Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1425 on: September 19, 2015, 07:01:49 AM »

New poll makes grim (if predictable) reading for Corbyn fans:

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/jeremy-corbyn-loses-fifth-of-labour-voters-with-critics-already-plotting-to-oust-him-10508584.html

28% think Corbyn is prime minister material... 72% do not.

If Labour does indeed lose 20% of it's voters that would put the party down at about 24 1/2% of the popular vote. Overall Labour looks less electable to 59% and more electable to 41% of the survey's respondents compared to May this year.

On the plus side the party could see it's popularity revive in Scotland with Corbyn as leader with 36% of SNP voters considering switching back to Labour.
Logged
jaichind
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 27,153
United States


Political Matrix
E: 9.03, S: -5.39

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1426 on: September 19, 2015, 07:59:49 AM »

What large swing in turn of events in just 10 years.  Back in 2005 I recall one can with legitimate arguments, say "Can the CONs win again?".  Now, with Corbyn in charge and another redistricting coming up one can with legitimate arguments say "Can the LABs  win again?"  What a difference a couple of redistricting taking away the natural LAB advantage in terms of vote share to seat translation plus a change in LAB leadership make in 10 years.
Logged
Phony Moderate
Obamaisdabest
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 12,298
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1427 on: September 19, 2015, 10:52:19 AM »

A lot of historical analogies have been made recently. How about these?

Ramsay MacDonald - Tony Blair (Scottish-born, very popular at first, but ultimately became loathed by the party base to the point of being virtually erased from party history)
Arthur Henderson - Gordon Brown/Ed Miliband (tried to move the party on from their predecessors; electorally failed due to a perception of economic incompetence)
George Lansbury - Jeremy Corbyn (elderly, principled and controversial left-wingers representing a London constituency (though both were born outside of London), disliked by their PLPs)
Clement Attlee - Huh Some fairly inoffensive but principled and well-respected London MP...Jon Cruddas?

Most of the above is probably silly but whatevs.
Logged
Antonio the Sixth
Antonio V
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 57,964
United States


Political Matrix
E: -7.87, S: -3.83

P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1428 on: September 19, 2015, 11:41:27 AM »

What large swing in turn of events in just 10 years.  Back in 2005 I recall one can with legitimate arguments, say "Can the CONs win again?".  Now, with Corbyn in charge and another redistricting coming up one can with legitimate arguments say "Can the LABs  win again?"  What a difference a couple of redistricting taking away the natural LAB advantage in terms of vote share to seat translation plus a change in LAB leadership make in 10 years.

Nah, it's mostly the media being morons and needlessly overdramatizing narratives.

Labour will win again, either in 2020 or in 2025. They'll probably win two or three elections and then the will win again two or three elections, then Labour etc. That's how politics work.
Logged
Leftbehind
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3,639
United Kingdom


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1429 on: September 19, 2015, 12:20:55 PM »

What large swing in turn of events in just 10 years.  Back in 2005 I recall one can with legitimate arguments, say "Can the CONs win again?".  Now, with Corbyn in charge and another redistricting coming up one can with legitimate arguments say "Can the LABs  win again?"  What a difference a couple of redistricting taking away the natural LAB advantage in terms of vote share to seat translation plus a change in LAB leadership make in 10 years.

A couple of things wrong with that, experts like Thrasher have already outlined that equitable constituencies were a minority of that advantage - unequal turnout (large turnout in safe Tory seats & poor turnout in safe Labour seats made for a larger Tory share of the vote, but equal seats) and tactical voting to keep Tories out were a far bigger advantage (that last one has unwound - as we witnessed the well-deserved collapse of the Lib Dems).

The far bigger threat, as Curtice has outlined, is that without the 40 odd Scottish seats the swings Labour need to make up for them begin to look impossible (upwards of 11% swing - Blair in 1997 couldn't achieve that) - so it's vital that Labour becomes more attractive to Scotland for its own survival. Corbyn looks the most attractive, in that regard, however he'll need to make sure not to lose existing voters, and in that:-


New poll makes grim (if predictable) reading for Corbyn fans:

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/jeremy-corbyn-loses-fifth-of-labour-voters-with-critics-already-plotting-to-oust-him-10508584.html

28% think Corbyn is prime minister material... 72% do not.

If Labour does indeed lose 20% of it's voters that would put the party down at about 24 1/2% of the popular vote. Overall Labour looks less electable to 59% and more electable to 41% of the survey's respondents compared to May this year.

On the plus side the party could see it's popularity revive in Scotland with Corbyn as leader with 36% of SNP voters considering switching back to Labour.

The Prime Ministerial figure isn't particularly concerning - it plays to assumptions what PMs must look like; as we seen with the post-PMQ sample on BBC News, the woman who said she'd vote for him was the most vocal in how he didn't appear Prime Ministerial, and didn't particularly see that as a negative.

Now the 59/41 is more concerning, but ignores low forties has seen many a PM in power. I wouldn't be surprised if Thatcher had similar numbers at one time - and alienating Tories now the endless triangulation has been dropped was always an acceptable loss. It also, like those others, doesn't give us any hard numbers. "More likely" means nothing if those 36% SNP voters go and vote SNP but with warmer thoughts about Labour, similarly if those 20% of Labour voters "less likely" is just registering less enthusiasm, but still vote any way. It's curious none of these polls have included a VI.

There is certainly work to be done - to counter the right-wing media narrative and halting the own-goals, because it's been a bit of a circus this week and I wasn't expecting great numbers because of that.
Logged
Antonio the Sixth
Antonio V
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 57,964
United States


Political Matrix
E: -7.87, S: -3.83

P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1430 on: September 19, 2015, 01:25:38 PM »

so it's vital that Labour becomes more attractive to Scotland for its own survival.

Not it's not. All you need to do is prevent Tories from winning an absolute majority and enter a coalition with SNP. There's no question SNP will choose to prop up a Labour government, as their voters would never forgive them for keeping a Torie government afloat.

Focusing on Scotland is the exact opposite of what Labour should do. You need to take seats away from the Tories in England, or they'll have a majority forever.
Logged
politicus
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 10,174
Denmark


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1431 on: September 19, 2015, 01:27:32 PM »

so it's vital that Labour becomes more attractive to Scotland for its own survival.

Not it's not. All you need to do is prevent Tories from winning an absolute majority and enter a coalition with SNP. There's no question SNP will choose to prop up a Labour government, as their voters would never forgive them for keeping a Torie government afloat.

Focusing on Scotland is the exact opposite of what Labour should do. You need to take seats away from the Tories in England, or they'll have a majority forever.

Reconquer the Midlands, basically.
Logged
Filuwaúrdjan
Realpolitik
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 67,609
United Kingdom


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1432 on: September 19, 2015, 01:27:51 PM »

Of course, who knows, maybe this isn't an either/or situation.
Logged
Filuwaúrdjan
Realpolitik
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 67,609
United Kingdom


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1433 on: September 19, 2015, 01:29:36 PM »


'twas ever thus: Labour has never won a majority without coming close to sweeping the board wrt swing seats here. And a poor performance in one specific part of the region was the reason why Wilson's majority in '64 was smaller than expected (thankfully for Labour things went fine elsewhere).
Logged
Antonio the Sixth
Antonio V
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 57,964
United States


Political Matrix
E: -7.87, S: -3.83

P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1434 on: September 19, 2015, 01:29:39 PM »

Of course, who knows, maybe this isn't an either/or situation.

Maybe. But the focus should be on taking seats away from the Tories. Certainly not on taking seats away from a party that would coalize with you anyway if push came to shove.
Logged
Leftbehind
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3,639
United Kingdom


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1435 on: September 19, 2015, 02:19:36 PM »

so it's vital that Labour becomes more attractive to Scotland for its own survival.

Not it's not. All you need to do is prevent Tories from winning an absolute majority and enter a coalition with SNP. There's no question SNP will choose to prop up a Labour government, as their voters would never forgive them for keeping a Torie government afloat.

Focusing on Scotland is the exact opposite of what Labour should do. You need to take seats away from the Tories in England, or they'll have a majority forever.

It's all well and good saying that, and a Labour government should certainly work with the SNP, but a Labour party that's given up on forming a majority again, and is beholden to SNP support, is very easily exploited by the Tory press and alienates the very same Labour-leaners identifying as more likely to vote Tory now because of Corbyn's election.

Also history tells us differently - the SNP helped bring Callaghan down after all. The fact is, as afleitch here demonstrates, SNP's constituents are varied and many care more about independence (especially their leadership). A Labour party not offering to sign off on another referendum will not be supported by the SNP, and if they do, then unionist Labour voters will punish them for it. 
Logged
Leftbehind
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3,639
United Kingdom


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1436 on: September 19, 2015, 02:33:32 PM »

Of course, who knows, maybe this isn't an either/or situation.

Maybe. But the focus should be on taking seats away from the Tories. Certainly not on taking seats away from a party that would coalize with you anyway if push came to shove.

It's obviously also important to win seats in Con-Lab marginals - however, done with social democratic answers (higher minimum wage, rent caps to bring down welfare spending for instance). If done correctly - it could bring disenfranchised, the young, Green voters, and importantly those working class offered little by liberalism & voting for UKIP & BNP.

More triangulation with the Tories might win the minority of Lab > Con switchers back, but at further cost to the Greens and abstention.
Logged
afleitch
Moderator
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 29,837


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1437 on: September 19, 2015, 02:46:30 PM »

The fact is, as afleitch here demonstrates, SNP's constituents are varied and many care more about independence (especially their leadership). A Labour party not offering to sign off on another referendum will not be supported by the SNP, and if they do, then unionist Labour voters will punish them for it. 

It's a little more complex than that. If Scottish politics settles on a unionist-nationalist axis, with the SNP standing in one corner and the Scottish Tories (who for many working class conservatives were actually detoxified in the referendum) breathing down Labour's neck, then what need is there for Labour in Scotland? What about 'Orange Labour' (something always there but now exposed in Labour's decomposition)? Having 'IRA sympathisers' in the top job is not exactly going to be endearing to whatever is left of their west central Scotland party machine.

Labour keep making an assumption they will always be there and that they always have a constituency of voters no matter what they do or don't do. They really ought to be a little concerned with what's happened this last week.
Logged
Blair
Blair2015
Atlas Politician
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 11,816
United Kingdom


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1438 on: September 19, 2015, 02:52:01 PM »

Yeah the SNP have been given a free ride for too long, they've been in power for the last 8 years yet managed to run as the outsiders in the General Election. Miliband's best line in the debates was 'I've been fighting the tories my whole life'
Logged
Leftbehind
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3,639
United Kingdom


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1439 on: September 19, 2015, 03:01:02 PM »

The fact is, as afleitch here demonstrates, SNP's constituents are varied and many care more about independence (especially their leadership). A Labour party not offering to sign off on another referendum will not be supported by the SNP, and if they do, then unionist Labour voters will punish them for it. 

It's a little more complex than that. If Scottish politics settles on a unionist-nationalist axis, with the SNP standing in one corner and the Scottish Tories (who for many working class conservatives were actually detoxified in the referendum) breathing down Labour's neck, then what need is there for Labour in Scotland? What about 'Orange Labour' (something always there but now exposed in Labour's decomposition)? Having 'IRA sympathisers' in the top job is not exactly going to be endearing to whatever is left of their west central Scotland party machine.

Labour keep making an assumption they will always be there and that they always have a constituency of voters no matter what they do or don't do. They really ought to be a little concerned with what's happened this last week.

You claim it's more complex and then bring out the laughable notion that there is only a unionist & nationalist divide, and there is no longer a need for a party that a) isn't Tory b) doesn't want independence - just so happening to be the majority of Scotland. As a Tory Separatist it just sounds like wishful thinking. If the Tories are so detoxified why are they still languishing in third place?
Logged
🦀🎂🦀🎂
CrabCake
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 19,192
Kiribati


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1440 on: September 19, 2015, 03:06:40 PM »

Isn't it curious how most people of all factions' conclusions from the elections happen to suggest that if the party was primarily dominated by their faction the loss would never have occurred?
Logged
Antonio the Sixth
Antonio V
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 57,964
United States


Political Matrix
E: -7.87, S: -3.83

P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1441 on: September 19, 2015, 03:44:01 PM »
« Edited: September 19, 2015, 03:47:35 PM by Californian Tony Returns »

I'm not saying Labour should loudly proclaim that they've given up on Scotland. And it sure would be nice if they could win back a few seats there as well. But I'm getting sick and tired of this bogus narrative that Labour absolutely needs to "reconquer" Scotland of they're doomed forever. That's a flat out lie and can be contradicted with basic math. Even if Labour had won every single seat in the entire Scotland, you'd still end up with Prime Minister Cameron, because he just won enough seats in England and Wales for an absolute majority.

So I don't give a crap if you don't want to have to deal with those nasty SNPers. The primary goal of any sane British leftist right now should be to stop the Tories before they completely wreck public services and the welfare system. If you're more concerned about something else, that means you're part of the problem.
Logged
🦀🎂🦀🎂
CrabCake
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 19,192
Kiribati


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1442 on: September 19, 2015, 03:59:43 PM »

The trouble is fear of the SNP is a good scare tactic for the right and their organs, even more effective than red-baiting Corbyn. after all, Corbyn is merely loony left, SNP are both loony and will be seen as openly favouring the country they represent.
Logged
Leftbehind
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3,639
United Kingdom


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1443 on: September 19, 2015, 04:00:03 PM »
« Edited: September 19, 2015, 04:01:44 PM by Acting like I'm Morrissey w/o the wit »

I'm not saying Labour should loudly proclaim that they've given up on Scotland. And it sure would be nice if they could win back a few seats there as well. But I'm getting sick and tired of this bogus narrative that Labour absolutely needs to "reconquer" Scotland of they're doomed forever. That's a flat out lie and can be contradicted with basic math. Even if Labour had won every single seat in the entire Scotland, you'd still end up with Prime Minister Cameron, because he just won enough seats in England and Wales for an absolute majority.

So I don't give a crap if you don't want to have to deal with those nasty SNPers. The primary goal of any sane British leftist right now should be to stop the Tories before they completely wreck public services and the welfare system. If you're more concerned about something else, that means you're part of the problem.

Bloody hell, have you even been paying attention? It's not a case of not wanting to deal with "nasty" SNPers (I actually quite welcome their influence in parliament), but there was no doubting that association with the SNP, trumped up by the Tory press, cost Labour in SNP-phobic England, so how on earth does that help us fight the Tories? Yes, let's fight the Tories by losing Labour-leaning voters to them! Great idea.

Anyway, polls:

YouGov CON 39 (-2), LAB 31 (+1), UKIP 16 (+3), LD 6 (-1)
ComRes CON 42 (+2), LAB 30 (+1), UKIP 13 (=), LD 7 (-1),  SNP 5 (=), GRN 3 (-1)
Opinum CON 37 (-1), LAB 32 (+1), UKIP 14 (+1), LD 6 (-2), SNP 5 (=), GRN 4 (=)

Not exactly amazing, but not terrible either, considering this week's been dreadful. 
Logged
🦀🎂🦀🎂
CrabCake
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 19,192
Kiribati


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1444 on: September 19, 2015, 04:05:07 PM »

It's interesting that Greens are polling pretty much as they always did.
Logged
Antonio the Sixth
Antonio V
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 57,964
United States


Political Matrix
E: -7.87, S: -3.83

P P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1445 on: September 19, 2015, 04:26:43 PM »

I'm not saying Labour should loudly proclaim that they've given up on Scotland. And it sure would be nice if they could win back a few seats there as well. But I'm getting sick and tired of this bogus narrative that Labour absolutely needs to "reconquer" Scotland of they're doomed forever. That's a flat out lie and can be contradicted with basic math. Even if Labour had won every single seat in the entire Scotland, you'd still end up with Prime Minister Cameron, because he just won enough seats in England and Wales for an absolute majority.

So I don't give a crap if you don't want to have to deal with those nasty SNPers. The primary goal of any sane British leftist right now should be to stop the Tories before they completely wreck public services and the welfare system. If you're more concerned about something else, that means you're part of the problem.

Bloody hell, have you even been paying attention? It's not a case of not wanting to deal with "nasty" SNPers (I actually quite welcome their influence in parliament), but there was no doubting that association with the SNP, trumped up by the Tory press, cost Labour in SNP-phobic England, so how on earth does that help us fight the Tories? Yes, let's fight the Tories by losing Labour-leaning voters to them! Great idea.

I highly doubt association with SNP is the first thing the marginal Middle England voter is thinking about when deciding to vote Torie. I can envision why that might be a problem (especially after a Lab-SNP coalition happens), but that's far from being the main issue. Maybe Labour should be concerned about the image they are themselves projecting, before thinking about how another party's negative image is affecting them.
Logged
Gary J
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 286
United Kingdom
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1446 on: September 19, 2015, 04:39:31 PM »

I do not see that a Labour minority government, dependent upon SNP acceptance that a Labour government would be better than a Conservative one, would be impossible.

The British hostility to Irish nationalism, in 1886-1914, was considerably stronger than English antipathy to the SNP. It did not prevent Liberal minority governments being formed in 1892-95 and 1910-14.
Logged
Leftbehind
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3,639
United Kingdom


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1447 on: September 19, 2015, 05:09:25 PM »

I'm not saying Labour should loudly proclaim that they've given up on Scotland. And it sure would be nice if they could win back a few seats there as well. But I'm getting sick and tired of this bogus narrative that Labour absolutely needs to "reconquer" Scotland of they're doomed forever. That's a flat out lie and can be contradicted with basic math. Even if Labour had won every single seat in the entire Scotland, you'd still end up with Prime Minister Cameron, because he just won enough seats in England and Wales for an absolute majority.

So I don't give a crap if you don't want to have to deal with those nasty SNPers. The primary goal of any sane British leftist right now should be to stop the Tories before they completely wreck public services and the welfare system. If you're more concerned about something else, that means you're part of the problem.

Bloody hell, have you even been paying attention? It's not a case of not wanting to deal with "nasty" SNPers (I actually quite welcome their influence in parliament), but there was no doubting that association with the SNP, trumped up by the Tory press, cost Labour in SNP-phobic England, so how on earth does that help us fight the Tories? Yes, let's fight the Tories by losing Labour-leaning voters to them! Great idea.

I highly doubt association with SNP is the first thing the marginal Middle England voter is thinking about when deciding to vote Torie. I can envision why that might be a problem (especially after a Lab-SNP coalition happens), but that's far from being the main issue. Maybe Labour should be concerned about the image they are themselves projecting, before thinking about how another party's negative image is affecting them.

It wasn't the first thing, but it was employed during the campaign to some effect - likely to be even more so now the SNP are looking to a hold another referendum, to Tory opposition. The prospect (yes, voters don't ignore it until it's actually happened), inflated by the Tories, was a problem for Labour at May's election when all the safe Blairites were in charge, and their image projection was carefully media-managed.

I do not see that a Labour minority government, dependent upon SNP acceptance that a Labour government would be better than a Conservative one, would be impossible.

The British hostility to Irish nationalism, in 1886-1914, was considerably stronger than English antipathy to the SNP. It did not prevent Liberal minority governments being formed in 1892-95 and 1910-14.

It's not impossible, no, but there's a reason the Tories ran with it.
Logged
Phony Moderate
Obamaisdabest
Atlas Icon
*****
Posts: 12,298
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1448 on: September 20, 2015, 02:48:27 AM »

I do not see that a Labour minority government, dependent upon SNP acceptance that a Labour government would be better than a Conservative one, would be impossible.

The British hostility to Irish nationalism, in 1886-1914, was considerably stronger than English antipathy to the SNP. It did not prevent Liberal minority governments being formed in 1892-95 and 1910-14.

But thanks to our wonderful media the SNP did effect the way many people voted.
Logged
afleitch
Moderator
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 29,837


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1449 on: September 20, 2015, 06:03:43 AM »

I do not see that a Labour minority government, dependent upon SNP acceptance that a Labour government would be better than a Conservative one, would be impossible.

The British hostility to Irish nationalism, in 1886-1914, was considerably stronger than English antipathy to the SNP. It did not prevent Liberal minority governments being formed in 1892-95 and 1910-14.

But thanks to our wonderful media the SNP did effect the way many people voted.

Except according to the British Election Study that didn't happen. UKIP voters returned to the Tories where they could stop Labour and the Lib Dems (but they didn't 'return' in seats where Labour were comfortably ahead). Also the movement of Lib Dems to Labour actually happened a little too greatly in at least 7 seats gifting them to the Tories (instead of Lib Dem holds)

http://www.ippr.org/juncture/learning-the-right-lessons-from-labours-2015-defeat

'The first is the ‘SNP threat’. As discussed above, we currently find little robust evidence that attitudes towards the SNP and expectations about a hung parliament resulted in gains for the Conservatives from Ukip or in vote losses for Labour from former Lib Dems. We cannot say for sure that this didn’t matter, but our explorations suggest it is a difficult effect to pin down.'
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 53 54 55 56 57 [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 0.063 seconds with 12 queries.