Jump to content

Recommended Posts

"I think the SNP took those Labour votes Dave, not the Tories"


Then you think wrong. If Labour hadn't lost any seats to the SNP the Tories would still have a majority. If Labour want to be in power they have to win in England.


The comparison is not between 2015 and 2010 but between both of those elections, and 1997/2001/2005. T Blair took voters from the Tories in England. Brown lost them, Ed couldn't win them back, and Jezza scares the living sh!t out of them/alternatively pisses them right off and/or makes them laugh (not in a good way).

You're missing something here DaveR. I feel the majority of the people who recently registered with the Labour Party were the old Labour grey vote and the disenfranchised young voters who couldn't be arsed to vote at the last election because they certainly didn't like the cut of "New Labour's jib but have now been galvanised by Corbynmania and will certainly be voting at the next one to get the feckin' Tories out though whether Corbyn remains as head of the opposition by then remains to be seen.

Jah Lush Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> You're missing something here DaveR. I feel the majority of the people who recently registered

> with the Labour Party were the old Labour grey vote and the disenfranchised young voters who

> couldn't be arsed to vote at the last election


Those 'young re-enfranchised' voters will be mostly in current urban labour seats.

Jah Lush Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> You're missing something here DaveR. I feel the

> majority of the people who recently registered

> with the Labour Party were the old Labour grey

> vote and the disenfranchised young voters who

> couldn't be arsed to vote at the last election

> because they certainly didn't like the cut of "New

> Labour's jib but have now been galvanised by

> Corbynmania and will certainly be voting at the

> next one to get the feckin' Tories out though

> whether Corbyn remains as head of the opposition

> by then remains to be seen.


But I think the problem for Labour is that they need to attract ex labour voters who are swing voters including some tory swing voters.


The latter will be hard to attract when every on sociual media is calling them 'thick or C*nts'; if anyone who questions anything Corbyn puts forward is called a Blue Tory (including Polly Tonybee for feck sake) some of them may actually start top move that way.


And if we use a small sample on the EDF of ex-Labour voters (that includes the likes of me and I *think* apolgies if wrong, the likes of MickMack)...I can telly you categorically I will vote Tory for the first time in my life if the alternative is Corybn/McDonnel and their ilk. In a slighlty wider sample in Scotland in the polls tory support is is going up (ok it's the polls) which presumably reflects some scots feeling like me.


Personally i think you're howling at the moon but five years is a long time and we will see.


Labour is streets ahead on Social Media...... as it was before the election.....

I don't disgree with you Dave regarding the swings that gave both Thatcher and Blair landslide majorities, but part of that 'landslide' was delivered by the type of electoral system we have. It's estimated that as little as 300,000 votes in traditionally English marginals actually decide workable majorities, that's out of how many eligible voters?. Hence the constant boundary changes by every government. Seats in Parliament have never been reflective of true voting share. So your words that 'millions of voters who chose Labour when it was led by Blair, but then chose the Tories led by Cameron over Ed' just isn't true. And Labour actually increased it's voting share on 2010 but lost seats.


http://www.nytimes.com/2015/05/09/upshot/how-labour-gained-votes-but-still-lost-seats.html?_r=0


I think to be fair ????s, you are not typical of a Labour voter. Whilst Corbyn does take the Labour party away from the centre ground, the Conservatives at present certainly aren't filling it. I think we have yet to see who steps in there and if the Lib Dems are smart about it, it could be just the stroke of luck they need to get back in the main. I'm not offended by Corbyn (I voted for him because a case does have to be made for the hardships of welfare reform and low wages, state intervention is needed in housing and some other areas where the free market does not deliver fairness). BUT the sticking point for me is McDonnel. I think he comes accross as weasly. I want a chancellor that sees capitalism as good for the economy, but finds a fairer way to make it work, rather than the extreme form we have at present. I don't think McDonnel is the one to deliver that and imo it is he, more than Corbyn, that will cost Labour.

Blah Blah Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Whilst Corbyn does take the Labour party away from the centre ground, the

> Conservatives at present certainly aren't filling it.


I think Osborne is having a damn good try. His last budget, whilst being very Tory, still contained more traditionally centre-left elements than any I've seen in the 25 years I've been in this country. Big increase in the minimum wage (much larger than Labour proposed), surcharge on bank profits, reduced tax relief on buy-to-let, abolished permanent non-dom status, levy on firms to fund apprenticeships. No Brown/Blair budget ever went anything like that. It was an obvious play for the centre ground.


Having said that, seeing that a proper centrist-liberal party just won in Canada makes me wish there was something like that in the UK. The Lib Dems could have been, but their history made it difficult for them to define exactly where they were in the political spectrum and, anyway, they seem to have hit a rather large speedhump in terms of electability. Labour and Conservative try for the centre ground, but both have to deal with their extreme wings - be it the loony-lefties or the rabid-righties. A true centrist party would be aligning itself with where most of the voters are.

???? Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Which is a 'relatively' small population

> geographically dispersed or in terms of students

> largely converted already?


There's very roughly about the same number of 20-35 as >60, about 20% of population overall. Sure, they're geographically dispersed, but in the close seats it could make a difference if the lot that doesn't vote turns out.


This was apropos of the "winning on social media" comment, and you're right, that's meaningless if the chatterers don't vote.

It's obviously possible that Corbyn could generate millions of 'extra' votes from previously demotivated young non-voters, and that the distribution of those votes could be such as to deliver a general election victory. As an electoral strategy for the main party of opposition it strikes me as somewhat risky. As the sole strategy (which is what it has to be if your core message is 'Tories are scum') it verges on the reckless.

miga Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> ???? Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > Which is a 'relatively' small population geographically dispersed or in terms of students

> > largely converted already?

>

> There's very roughly about the same number of 20-35 as >60, about 20% of population overall.

> Sure, they're geographically dispersed, but in the close seats it could make a difference if the lot

> that doesn't vote turns out.


Are they really geographically dispersed? Or are Corbyn supporting ones mostly residing in the very seats Labour has already won - i.e. urban central?

???? Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> ..and the madness continues. It's the complete

> amatuerishnes let alone the outdated ideology.

>

> http://www.cityam.com/226587/labour-to-city-were-j

> ust-not-that-into-you

>

> God help us all, including the poorest, if these

> clowns ever get near to power


Quoting City AM to make a point.


That's pretty good, I have to admit.

dogcatdog Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> ???? Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > ..and the madness continues. It's the complete

> > amatuerishnes let alone the outdated ideology.

> >

> >

> http://www.cityam.com/226587/labour-to-city-were-j

>

> > ust-not-that-into-you

> >

> > God help us all, including the poorest, if

> these

> > clowns ever get near to power

>

> Quoting City AM to make a point.

>

> That's pretty good, I have to admit.



Hi Snorks - still got a bullet for me you alcoholic Stalinist?

Loz Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> miga Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > ???? Wrote:

> >

> --------------------------------------------------

>

> > -----

> > > Which is a 'relatively' small population

> geographically dispersed or in terms of students

> > > largely converted already?

> >

> > There's very roughly about the same number of

> 20-35 as >60, about 20% of population overall.

> > Sure, they're geographically dispersed, but in

> the close seats it could make a difference if the

> lot

> > that doesn't vote turns out.

>

> Are they really geographically dispersed? Or are

> Corbyn supporting ones mostly residing in the very

> seats Labour has already won - i.e. urban central?


Hence the 'or' loz. The easy part are already converted.

It's just guesswork. I'm assuming most seats in the UK have similar age structures, with a few outliers. The other assumption is that young people are more likely to have their views align with Corbyn than older people. I have no data to back this up, but if you do to prove the opposite, I'm all ears.

I would think rural areas have lost younger generations who have moved to find jobs, homes they can afford etc. The new registration rules will make things interesting too. We might see some differences in University towns in some elections.


Who knows what the Corbyn effect will be - it's all guesswork at the moment. Next years local elections might be an indicator.

Amis nails it in the Times* today


Milne's another joke appointment - a privately educated, stalinist who hates this country and the West and is an apologist for Putin as the whole left now seems to be


*yes I know, corporate global, murdoch media, etc etc and whatever other tedious meme's the useful idiots of social media would come up


A new kind of politics = my arse , old school leftism mixed with puerile, juvenile social media activism

That's a bit unfair ????s. The Labour party is not and never will be as far left as it was in the distant past. One appointment does not a party make. And the media have behaved pretty appallingly in fueling the kind of hysteria you have just demonstrated ;)


My impression, from listening carefully to what Corbyn and McDonnell are saying, is that they want the Labour party to move towards arguing for a fairer form of capitalism where it's understood that the state has to be repsonsible for providing some things. There's nothing new or scary about that. The debate is simply about what should be state supported and what should not. What doesn't work however is the privatisation of everything and leaving the free market to take care of it all.

The Labour party lost the election to Mrs T when its Militant tendency mob were exposed, so the true lefties will never stick their heads above the parapet again when we are close to an election. The State does try very hard to be responsible for providing things i.e. safety nets, but unfortunately there is a hard core of the population hell-bent on exploiting the system and perpetuating the black market

Er so the Winter of Discontent had nothing to do with it then?


Every economic system has black markets. There's no getting away from that. Even the worst police states have them.


As for exploiting the system, that too runs through every level of society from the billionaires at the top to the penniless pauper at the bottom.

Blah Blah Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

>

> Every economic system has black markets. There's

> no getting away from that. Even the worst police

> states have them.


I would even say, especially the worst police states have them. When you tell people that blue jeans aren't ideologically suitable, blue jeans become very valuable. I bet there's someone making a pretty penny selling Levis in Pyongyang right now. The trick is to make enough people believe they can have lovely things, and to legitimise the process of acquiring them. Sure, you can have a massive telly, at 50% interest. Everyone's happy.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • Gone to the better hunting grounds during this local ongoing dry spell.
    • The Dreamliner has an impeccable service history, you are more likely to get mugged on the way to the airport than having any issue with your flight, that's how safe it is!  Have a great trip.
    • Maybe. Does that kill grass? If so, possibly the same dog that has left its poo outside my house - pretty sure it's not fox poo.
    • Here you are, intexasatthemoment (you seem to have been in Texas for a very long time!) We went to three of the recommended places yesterday,  as they were all in the same road (just near Wallington)  and I needed to give the car a run to avoid another slap on the wrist from my garage (and another new battery). Here's my findings. BARNES Parking We thought we would go here first as it was the earliest to close on a Sunday (3pm). There was no apparent entrance or anywhere to park. One notice said do not park on grass verge, and another one said staff cars only! Flittons was opposite but I'd already passed the entrance, so I had to drive down the road, turn round at the next available place (covered in signs saying do not park here) and park in Flittons car park! Plants Barnes  specialise in hardy perennials, so that was basically what they had, but an excellent selection, and many more unusual plants (or at least, plants you probably wouldn't find in a garden centre), eg Corydalis,  lots of different varieties of Epimediums, Trollius, some lovely Phygelius, lots of different ferns). The plants were divided into sections according to whether they needed sun or shade or could cope with both. They had a particularly good selection of  shade loving plants. There was really useful information above  each group of plants, which meant you didn't have to look at individual labels. All the plants looked in good health and  very well cared for. They don't produce a printed catalogue, but they  said their plant list was online (I haven't looked yet). I assume most of  the plants they have at any one time are when it's their flowering season (if they flower). I wasn't intending to buy anything, though was very tempted, but I'd definitely go here again once I've sorted out my overgrown garden. Other Stuff Don't think they sell pots, compost, etc. No cafe/tea room and I didn't see a loo, but Flittons is just over the road. FLITTONS  Parking Easy to park Plants Sorry, but mostly terrible. There was one section with vegetables and the rest was flowering plants. There was a general feeling of delapidation. Some of what was on display was actually dead (surely it would only take a minute to remove dead plants) and a lot of the rest was very poorly maintained, eg gone to seed, weedy, apparently unwatered, or with a lot of dead leaves. There was a notice asking for volunteers to work there, so I can only assume they can't afford to pay staff. Other stuff There was a notice to a play barn (?) saying invited people only, so I think they must host kids' parties or something. They redeemed themselves with a cosy little cafe with savoury stuff, nice cakes, iced chai and oat milk, and a loo. Also a selection of books and CDs on sale for charity. If you want an Andrews Sisters CD, you can find one here. There is a small shop with gift shop type stuff and a display of the history of Flittons, which apparently is family owned since the sixties (I think it was). I suspect that the arrival of Dobbies down the road must have greatly affected Flittons' fortunes, which is sad. DOBBIES  Parking Easy in theory once you had navigated a rather narrow entrance, but it was very busy so it took a while to find a space. Plants  Lots of plants, well maintained but I imagine their turnover is high. Lots of nice bedding plants for hanging baskets, window boxes etc  to cater for all tastes (ie some of it wasn't mine, but fine if you like those horrid little begonias (my opinion only) but they did have some nice (in my opinion) stuff as well. I was tempted but decided to buy from North Cross Road market. Fair selection of climbers, various different Clematis etc. I'd be happy to buy plants from here. The prices seemed reasonable and they were in good condition. Other stuff  It's a big garden centre with all that entails these days, so a large area selling garden furniture and storage, tools, animal collars, pots, all the usual stuff you would expect. Very helpful staff. There's a cafe which we didn't check out, charging points for electric cars, a Waitrose (no idea how big, we didn't look). Only on our way out did we see that there was a drive through "express section" for compost etc, which was annoying as I wanted compost and hadn't seen any anywhere,  but I was getting tired by that time. Just Down the Road A ten minute drive away is Wilderness Island, a nature reserve in Carshalton, which is well worth a visit. We heard eleven different kinds of bird (according to Merlin) and saw a Kingfisher flying down the tiny river!
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...