How Much is a Corbyn?

antrobus

Mistermeaner wrote: »

What is so frightening about Corbyn is that people seem to believe that his ridiculous policies are (I) acheivable and (ii) would be beneficial.......

Only some people.

New ComRes poll out today. 36% of people think that the state of the economy would be worse under Corbyn, compared to 14% who think it would improve. About the only thing that people think would be better under Corbyn is the railways, and then only by a margin of 23%-22%.:)

Oh yes. Top line results;

Con 40%, Lab 29%, LD 8%, UKIP 13%, Green 4%, SNP 5%, Other 1%

http://comres.co.uk/polls/sunday-mirror-independent-on-sunday-august-poll/

Generali

cells wrote: »

What can he do its not like he can fire an MP who doesn't vote for him and he will be a one term PM which will mean his last 1-2 years or so will be weak as the party starts to gravitate towards the next guy. Or he might even do a Tony and leave early. I suppose he can try put pressure on the local labour parties to deselect the MPs he doesn't like next time around but he won't be thrre next time around and I suspect thry would say f.u anyway

Plus I suspect the parties guage how their MPs would vote on certain ideas well before they consider putting something forward.

So unless he can get a majority of his owb MPs to back him his radical ideas won't pass and he wont put them forward else he will look a fool when hisbown larty blocks it.

of course this is assuming there are a good few blairites who would block him. I reckon most people are quote flexable and if the mood in the labor party changed a lot of blairites would change (maybe just acting in herds or peer pressure)

Anyway I dont think this mans a joke imo he is a whole level more capable and likeable on a bad day thab Ed ever was om his good days

He could, with the support of the membership, remove moderates from key posts on the NEC and in constituency parties. I think that's the plan but such is the degree of reporting on him it's hard to say what is something he said and what is something that the papers have made up.

The Jewish Chronicle piece was interesting. For someone who is so anti-war ber sure likes hanging out with people that are really quite pro war.

Moby

antrobus wrote: »

Only some people.

New ComRes poll out today. 36% of people think that the state of the economy would be worse under Corbyn, compared to 14% who think it would improve. About the only thing that people think would be better under Corbyn is the railways, and then only by a margin of 23%-22%.:)

Oh yes. Top line results;

Con 40%, Lab 29%, LD 8%, UKIP 13%, Green 4%, SNP 5%, Other 1%

http://comres.co.uk/polls/sunday-mirror-independent-on-sunday-august-poll/

The Comres results are very poor for Corbyn and more or less what I would expect but on the specific issues they only ask about Corbyn so can’t compare with the other candidates.. odd!
On improve Labours chances of winning the next GE
Corbin -10
Burnham +5
Cooper -3
Kendall -6
On Corbyn (in order) Greens, SNP and Labour think he would improve Labours chances.
Cons, UKIP, Lib Dems weaken
The main reason people give for not voting Labour – the economy.
Corbyn scores -22 with only 14% thinking he would improve the state of the economy. Cons are -63% with only 3% saying he would improve the economy. UKIP are -36% with only 9% thinking he would improve the economy. Lib Dems are -24% and 12%. The only nets positives are the anti-Austerity Greens +25 which actually exceeds the Labour voters +15. The anti-Austerity SNP is a neutral net 0.
Labour lost the GE on the economy in England. Corbyn looks like the wrong choice if they want to win in 2020.
And the Greens seem to be the most positive about Corbyn even more so than Labour.
So he may pick up votes from Greens and to an extent SNP but may lose some Labour votes are already down at a low level.....but polls are just a snapshot remember!

cells

Mistermeaner wrote: »

What is so frightening about Corbyn is that people seem to believe that his ridiculous policies are (I) acheivable and (ii) would be beneficial

It's almost as if there is a collective a amnesia about 'the good old days' even though they werent better and that by backing corbyn we go back to the golden years (that weren't golden) or British gas, British telecom, British rail, mining, ICI, shop stewards, unions etc

He seems to be invoking some sort of blitz spirit that makes people think if they club together they can get a 'fairer' deal - this may once have had its time but that approach delivered what it did which is why we are where we are - corbyn almost wants to reverse Thatcher - what he and his supporters don't see is that the world has moved on and for brittons to have the excellent quality of life we enjoy we need to compete as a nation in a global free market. If we make our domestic market not free our global competitiveness and attractiveness dips, our buying power goes with it and everything gets very very expensive - suddenly we can't afford all the nice things we want.

If socialism worked it would have worked and we would all be copying the eastern block - why is the opposite happening?

Any attempts to now 'socialise' the value derived from free market economics will see us fall off the value train and go backwards very very quickly - you have to keep peddling hard to even keep up nowadays with our ever increasing wage demands and aging population.

Ironically if the nhs was as bad as people make out it would actually be better for us generally as people wouldn't live as long.

He could just introduce state competitors. Eg set up a ltd company inject a few milliom into it and say away you go. Their remit probably would be to minimise prices rather than maximise profits. So corybn power and light might offer just one tarrif and no advertising. Even if it doesn't get a lot of customers say just 2-3% its offer of cheaper prices would force the rest down that path. However it woild probably take a significant chunk of the market as a lot of socialists wpupd use corybn power and light becuase it is a 'national' company

that wouldn't or shouldn't upset people he is just increasing competition

the true monopolies he could just buy out. Eg national grid is a monopoly and the regulator controls it and its profits. But why would he need to do that? Arguably ossuing gilts and buying them out would be profitable long term. Do an EDF and make it 'private' but own 90% of the shares

cells

Moby wrote: »

The Comres results are very poor for Corbyn and more or less what I would expect but on the specific issues they only ask about Corbyn so can’t compare with the other candidates.. odd!
On improve Labours chances of winning the next GE
Corbin -10
Burnham +5
Cooper -3
Kendall -6
On Corbyn (in order) Greens, SNP and Labour think he would improve Labours chances.
Cons, UKIP, Lib Dems weaken
The main reason people give for not voting Labour – the economy.
Corbyn scores -22 with only 14% thinking he would improve the state of the economy. Cons are -63% with only 3% saying he would improve the economy. UKIP are -36% with only 9% thinking he would improve the economy. Lib Dems are -24% and 12%. The only nets positives are the anti-Austerity Greens +25 which actually exceeds the Labour voters +15. The anti-Austerity SNP is a neutral net 0.
Labour lost the GE on the economy in England. Corbyn looks like the wrong choice if they want to win in 2020.
And the Greens seem to be the most positive about Corbyn even more so than Labour.
So he may pick up votes from Greens and to an extent SNP but may lose some Labour votes are already down at a low level.....but polls are just a snapshot remember!

The public get their information from the mediaband as such these polls omo are no more than asling the public to repeat what they have herd from TV and read in newspapers. The media will change over the next 5 years

antrobus

Moby wrote: »

....
On improve Labours chances of winning the next GE
Corbin -10
Burnham +5
Cooper -3
Kendall -6
....

What's interesting is if you compare the results for some other names that are not standing.

As in Blair -43, Brown -45, and Ed M -50.:)

David M is however +11.

antrobus

cells wrote: »

The public get their information from the mediaband as such these polls omo are no more than asling the public to repeat what they have herd from TV and read in newspapers. The media will change over the next 5 years

What makes you think that will make things better for Corbyn?

cepheus

How much is a Corbyn?

I don't know, but it's great value in relation to a Goodwin and the others on this list.

http://content.time.com/time/specials/packages/article/0,28804,1877351_1877350_1877328,00.html

CLAPTON

cepheus wrote: »

How much is a Corbyn?

I don't know, but it's great value in relation to a Goodwin and the others on this list.

http://content.time.com/time/specials/packages/article/0,28804,1877351_1877350_1877328,00.html

seems a very appropriate comparison

you could start a poll on which overall, would prove to be worse, for the UK

antrobus

cepheus wrote: »

How much is a Corbyn?

I don't know, but it's great value in relation to a Goodwin and the others on this list.

http://content.time.com/time/specials/packages/article/0,28804,1877351_1877350_1877328,00.html

An interesting list that blames American Consumers for the crisis but not American Banks, on the grounds that American Consumers loaded up on debt to the tune of 130% of income. Curiously enough, I think the comparative figure for British Consumers would be more like 160% of income.

Now we know who was really at fault.:)