Jeremy Corbyn.

[Simster]

Being marginally left of centre, i have voted labour at one of the last 2 elections (in the other i voted tactically to try and keep the conservatives out)

Under Corbyn i will not vote labour under any circumstances. Pretty much a reflection of the polls above this post. He may well appeal to the dyed in the wool labour heartland, but that is no way near enough to win an election. Labour's vote will be reduced to it's skeletal status, and possibly pave the way for a Lib-Dem resurgence.

In that case, my politics have been broadly in line with yours, but I'm prepared to give him more of a chance. I can't get angry about his IRA conversations or not singing the national anthem. I don't particularly like the idea of income tax >50% at any level, but if he is going to up it to 70% for people earning over a million a year, I can't say it bothers me much.

It feels as if this country has become a less "just" place after decades of Tory rule and patsy centre ground Blairite career politicians with absolutely no vision. If Corbyn has ideas of how to fix this, and if he appears to be a moral person in his actions going forward, then personally I want to see more. So far I like what I see - dozens of right wing Labour no-marks are running away, as if they were ever wanted in the first place. Good stuff.

 

[Gwylan]

The SWP had 5,000 members before they split last year. the Socialist Party (which is what Militant became) has 4000 members, even saying the remaining trotskyist parties have 3,500 between them that is 12.500. the labour party put on 200,000 members and suppoorters. Even assuming everyone of those 12,500 gave up their membership of their party and joined the labour party, which i can assure you hasnt happened, that makes 8% of the increase. Your struggle to believe they could warp the election, is well founded.

The Socialist Party had a policy of not registering as supporters - that's not to say that some ignored the instruction but it wouldn't have been a mass amount.

This IS people's perception of him right now and with a comparison of how people felt about Miliband when he took over, it's not asking people for an informed opinion of how they will feel in 6 months or a year's time!

Ooh, I was surveyed for that: I was one of those very people giving my opinion -first time I've ever seen a survey quoted where I'm one of the respondents

 

[Buzzer]

Ooh, I was surveyed for that: I was one of those very people giving my opinion -first time I've ever seen a survey quoted where I'm one of the respondents

Tesco's Holmbush or Church Road?

 

[narly101]

I just couldn't bring myself to vote for someone who's popped into Oxfam for his debut PMQ's suit and tie combo. Could you vote for this person?

 

[Bold Seagull]

Tell you what, next time have a read of what I wrote before you go into automatic Corbyn defence mode. This IS people's perception of him right now and with a comparison of how people felt about Miliband when he took over, it's not asking people for an informed opinion of how they will feel in 6 months or a year's time! Hence my comments about Corbyn having a lot of work to do to win the general public over. Of course he's only just started in his job - and this is how people feel about him right now.

Jesus wept, the knee-jerk reaction on here to anything that looks remotely hostile to Corbyn is laughable.

Tell you what Buzzer, why don't you read what I have wrote - I'm asking who in a poll can make an informed decision whether a perception or otherwise- either way as it happens, as it's very early to even be forming perceptions. How people feel about him now is largely going to be irrelevant until we start to see him in action properly and what policies are revealed.

Ed Miliband was a known recognised high profile public figure, most people wouldn't have even heard of Jeremy Corbyn a month ago, so are people's perceptions of him right now really relevant, do you think?

It's not a knee-jerk reaction at all. You've been on this thread with the whole females in the top jobs, what other MP's have apparently said, now Polls etc. and you get upset with your 'Jesus wept' because someone just picks you up on the revelance of a poll at this stage. Bloodyhell man get a grip!

 

[beorhthelm]

He's not even been in the job a full 4 working days yet. Who is even capable of forming an informed opinion of him when he's only just formed he's cabinet, and yet to agree on any concrete policy proposals. Are YouGov doing what they did before the general election and just canvassing people coming out of Tesco's!?

he has a 30 year track record in political views and positions, and has been voted in as leader largely on the basis of that record and a reputation for sticking to his principles. so its not unfair to form an outline opinion from that.

this is his strength and Achilles heal, as the moment he wanders off from his historic views for good pragmatic reasons, he'll be accused of abandoning his principles. if he sticks to them, he wont be able to effectively run his opposition. he is deferring policy to Labour conference in part because thats his belief, but also because it side steps him having to be a hostage to this dilemma.

 

[Hungry Joe]

he is deferring policy to Labour conference in part because thats his belief, but also because it side steps him having to be a hostage to this dilemma.

This is certainly true. As I said previously, if he can pull off this balancing act it will be a minor political miracle and mean that he has become a very skilled leader. I just can't see it happening though.

 

[Normal Rob]

So far I like what I see - dozens of right wing Labour no-marks are running away, as if they were ever wanted in the first place. Good stuff.

Lol, i guess i'm one of those ones!

I'm sure that what's left will make a very cosy little club of like minded individuals. Good on 'em.

 

[Billy the Fish]

You really show how little you know of the history of the Labour party and its funding when you make this comment. The Labour party was founded by Trade unions in 1900 to be the political voice of the trade union movement. As a result of this its initial funding and even now more than 50% of its funding comes from trade unions. Unite alone contributes £3.5 million to the labour party. Without trade union funds the labour party would be bankrupt. It would be unable to anywhere near match the tories in donations from business and membership even now after the recent increase wouldnt pay for the running costs of the party, never mind election campaigns.

In return for the donations Trade union members get very little we get a right to vote in elections. The last Labour Government did very little to help trade unions. Certainly our donations dont buy as much influence as donations from big business buys in the tory party. The Labour party and Trade Unions are intrinsically bound together by history and finance.

I understand all that, my point is that the unions are stuck in 1970 industrial Britain and seem happy for Labour to be in opposition as long as they preach the socialist message, which the modern affluent middle class electorate will never vote into power.

They still follow a model conceived during an industrial period where most people were employed in factories. They are now a millstone around the party's neck, which is tricky when they provide all the funding. Blair somehow managed to drag the Labour party into this century, and the unions begrudgingly allowed it for a few years but now they have gone back to their roots again and the party is currently unelectable.

And please don't think I'm against unions, I'm a member of Unite and they can obviously be good to protect people from exploitation, but I wish that was mutually exclusive from the political side of things.

 

[Bold Seagull]

he has a 30 year track record in political views and positions, and has been voted in as leader largely on the basis of that record and a reputation for sticking to his principles. so its not unfair to form an outline opinion from that.

this is his strength and Achilles heal, as the moment he wanders off from his historic views for good pragmatic reasons, he'll be accused of abandoning his principles. if he sticks to them, he wont be able to effectively run his opposition. he is deferring policy to Labour conference in part because thats his belief, but also because it side steps him having to be a hostage to this dilemma.

Compromise in politics should be seen as a strength. While a fictional drama, the whole of The West Wing's success as a political drama was that the compromising of individual principles is what democracy is all about. It will be very interesting to see, but so far it could be a strength if he listens to his cabinet, his party and forms policy based on that and not just his own ideology, then he could be perceived as progressive and as a positive.

I honestly haven't formed an opinion either way as a leader. I've said it's exciting for politics that someone out of the left field, someone not groomed for the top job or supported by the media should make such an impact. I'm prepared to give him a chance though.

 

[Buzzer]

Tell you what Buzzer, why don't you read what I have wrote - I'm asking who in a poll can make an informed decision whether a perception or otherwise

Derrrrrrr...for the second time.,

No-one can have an informed opinion but they are NOT asking people to guess what they will think of him once everyone has an informed opinion. It's a snapshot of what they think of him now. That was the purpose of the poll, that was what the questions related to, that's what the results show. You might not be too interested in it or think it relevant but the Labour Party are very, very interested in this because it's their baseline and shows how much work they need to do to change people's perceptions. I think that's quite uncontroversial. It's not a pop at Corbyn, even his biggest supporters at the top table of politics have said this.

'The Jesus wept' comment was because I posted about a YouGov poll showing people's initial perceptions of Corbyn and you went straight into whining about people not having had a chance to assess him. It wasn't the purpose of the poll!

 

[Blue Valkyrie]

he has a 30 year track record in political views and positions, and has been voted in as leader largely on the basis of that record and a reputation for sticking to his principles. so its not unfair to form an outline opinion from that.

this is his strength and Achilles heal, as the moment he wanders off from his historic views for good pragmatic reasons, he'll be accused of abandoning his principles. if he sticks to them, he wont be able to effectively run his opposition. he is deferring policy to Labour conference in part because thats his belief, but also because it side steps him having to be a hostage to this dilemma.

That is his dilemma.

If he changes too much he betrays those who support him now.

If he doesn't change enough, he won't be elected by the rest of the country.

 

[Gwylan]

h
this is his strength and Achilles heal, as the moment he wanders off from his historic views for good pragmatic reasons, he'll be accused of abandoning his principles. if he sticks to them, he wont be able to effectively run his opposition. he is deferring policy to Labour conference in part because thats his belief, but also because it side steps him having to be a hostage to this dilemma.

I'm not sure either of those statements is true. Historically, he has been in favour of members determining policy, well before he became leader.

I'm not convinced that diverting from one his principles would be seized on. He's already said that while he's personally anti-monarchist and opposed to NATO, he's not expecting those to be policies. He voted against the EU and is set to support continued membership. He said these before he was elected and yet his supporters still backed him. No politician, outside the fringe parties, is entirely unbending

 

[Billy the Fish]

I don't particularly like the idea of income tax >50% at any level, but if he is going to up it to 70% for people earning over a million a year, I can't say it bothers me much. .

So it's ok then, as long as it doesn't affect you!

 

[Simster]

Lol, i guess i'm one of those ones!

I'm sure that what's left will make a very cosy little club of like minded individuals. Good on 'em.

You're a right wing Labour career politician like Yvette Cooper?

 

[Bold Seagull]

Derrrrrrr...for the second time.,

No-one can have an informed opinion but they are NOT asking people to guess what they will think of him once everyone has an informed opinion. It's a snapshot of what they think of him now. That was the purpose of the poll, that was what the questions related to, that's what the results show. You might not be too interested in it or think it relevant but the Labour Party are very, very interested in this because it's their baseline and shows how much work they need to do to change people's perceptions. I think that's quite uncontroversial. It's not a pop at Corbyn, even his biggest supporters at the top table of politics have said this.

'The Jesus wept' comment was because I posted about a YouGov poll asking people's initial perceptions of Corbyn and you went straight into whining about people not having had a chance to assess him. It wasn't the purpose of the poll!

Funny that derrrrr for the second time given you posted these polls with... 'this is particularly damning...', 'this doesn't augur well for him...', ...followed by you seemingly making quite bold claims based on the polling such as... "It's pretty difficult to see Corbyn winning people over with his prospective management of defence, the economy, world politics, terrorism et al.".....So you made your own opinions from the polls, but for someone to question the relevance of them is a jesus wept and a derrrr, and an arms up oh the knee jerk reactions....

 

[Diablo]

Whilst I can understand Corbyns appeal to anyone promised a better deal under Corbyn.(Promises are easy to make from the opposition bench) .....Surely no one can honestly believe that Corbyn would make a good Prime Minister..can they ??

 

[Simster]

So it's ok then, as long as it doesn't affect you!

Or indeed anybody except people earning astronomical sums.

If you're going to take the view you're taking, can I assume you're against any sort of progressive tax? Because unless you're at the very very top of the pile, there is always going to be a point at which you're not affected and could have that very same accusation levelled at you...

 

[Buzzer]

Funny that derrrrr for the second time given you posted these polls with... 'this is particularly damning...', 'this doesn't augur well for him...', ...followed by you seemingly making quite bold claims based on the polling such as... "It's pretty difficult to see Corbyn winning people over with his prospective management of defence, the economy, world politics, terrorism et al.".....So you made your own opinions from the polls, but for someone to question the relevance of them is a jesus wept and a derrrr, and an arms up oh the knee jerk reactions....

It's called inferrence. He starts from a very low base and much weaker support than Miliband. Miliband got roasted in the last election for...and this is from TUC data...
1. not being trusted on the economy
2. being weak on immigration
3. spending too much.

Therefore it doesn't augur well for him, it is pretty damning and it is difficult to see, given that TUC data, how he will succeed where Miliband failed.

Stop digging, eh?

 

[Bold Seagull]

It's called inferrence. He starts from a very low base and much weaker support than Miliband. Miliband got roasted in the last election for...and this is from TUC data...
1. not being trusted on the economy
2. being weak on immigration
3. spending too much.

Therefore it doesn't augur well for him, it is pretty damning and it is difficult to see, given that TUC data, how he will succeed where Miliband failed.

Stop digging, eh?

Stop digging, jesus wept, derrr for the second time....Suddenly it's now all sensible debate which is all my first post was, but it somehow prompted your overreaction (again), and now I'm digging... The other day you actually said I was making snide remarks - one of which was accusing you of oneupmanship....who'd have thought!!??