How Much is a Corbyn?

cepheus

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

Here's the key quote from that article...

They then go on to conclude exactly what many are saying on here...

Politics without compromise generally makes for poor politics and even worse governance.

Society is diverse and holds conflicting and often contradictory views, that change over time, and that are incapable of being represented fully by a party that sticks firmly to either a left or right wing set of 'principles'.

Hence why politicians are the way they are...

Most successful political leaders in modern times have been masters of the art of triangulation, picking popular and achievable ideas from both the left and right and building a consensus to get things done.

And I rather suspect that's actually a good thing for social cohesion, it's better to have everyone moan a little because the party in power does a few things they dislike, than to have half the country in rapture while the rest are ready to rebel...

Why not just include all the various policies and see which party conforms closest to the public's wishes?

https://data.voteforpolicies.org.uk/countries/results#countries/england

but don't despair, the public are probably more interested in personalities than policies, and the right wing dominated media will make sure the rich will win. Good job for you eh?

cepheus

Generali wrote: »

Boris's take on the Labour leadership campaign.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/labour/11806571/We-Tories-are-in-a-state-of-disbelief-about-Jeremy-Corbyn.html

I'm in disbelief how people could vote for such an elitist, arrogant, restaurant trashing, toff.



There's only a few Tories who realise their neo-liberal system is seriously being challenged by someone in opposition

Tories should be scared of Jeremy Corbyn capturing the 'zeitgeist', warns Zac Goldsmith

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/tories-should-be-scared-of-jeremy-corbyn-capturing-the-zeitgeist-warns-zac-goldsmith-10455102.html

Generali

cepheus wrote: »

Why not just include all the various policies and see which party conforms closest to the public's wishes?

https://data.voteforpolicies.org.uk/countries/results#countries/england

but don't despair, the public are probably more interested in personalities than policies, and the right wing dominated media will make sure the rich will win. Good job for you eh?

So you're saying that the difference between the number of people who support the Tories on Vote for Policies (15%) and the number who actually vote Tory (more than double the proportion) is wholly down to the right wing dominated media and people being more interested than personalities than policies.

Vote for Policies isn't representative of anything other than the users of Vote for Policies. Have a think about why a group of internet users (younger, on average, than the population at large) would tend to show more leftist tendencies than the population as a whole is it:

a. Right wing media?
b. Left wingers being so dour and awful that people interested in personalities can't bring themselves to vote for them?
c. Young people being over-represented among left wing voters and internet users?

Only you can decide.

Generali

cepheus wrote: »

I'm in disbelief how people could vote for such an elitist, arrogant, restaurant trashing, toff.



There's only a few Tories who realise their neo-liberal system is seriously being challenged by someone in opposition

Tories should be scared of Jeremy Corbyn capturing the 'zeitgeist', warns Zac Goldsmith

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/tories-should-be-scared-of-jeremy-corbyn-capturing-the-zeitgeist-warns-zac-goldsmith-10455102.html

That would be the same Zac Goldsmith who is the son of Sir and Lady Goldsmith and is married to a Rothschild.

So in the same post you seem to think that the current Tories are too posh to be in power, based mostly on their actions at a restaurant once when they were students yet are quite happy to take another Tory toff's word as gospel.

I agree that there is a risk that Corbyn will be seen as the man of the moment. The man of the Zeitgeist. I would argue that the bigger risk is that Corbyn wins and then is completely unable to govern his own party, leading them to a shattering defeat and locking Labour out of power for a generation as Foot did.

I mean at least Foot had a decent track record as a Cabinet minister before this. Corbyn has just been a PITA for the whips and a friend to terrorists around the world.

MS1950

It's good to see that the candidates in the Leadership election and their supporters (and everyone else in the Labour 'hierarchy') are fully following the letter and spirit of the party's 'Code of Conduct'

"C. Elections for Leader and Deputy Leader 2015 -
Candidate Code of Conduct

1. This code of conduct has been produced for all aspiring candidates and validly nominated candidates in the selection of Leader and Deputy Leader of the Labour Party in order to assist the smooth running of all stages of the process.

2. The provisions of this code of conduct apply to any aspiring candidate and those campaigning on their behalf.

CONDUCT OF CANDIDATE CAMPAIGNS

3. No candidates or persons acting on behalf of a candidate will use their own material, access to publicity or any media outlets to disparage or brief against any other candidate":

http://www.labour.org.uk/page/-/blog%20images/C_Leadership_Election_2015_Candidate_Code_of_Condu ct.pdf

HAMISH_MCTAVISH

cepheus wrote: »

Why not just include all the various policies and see which party conforms closest to the public's wishes?

Because when you use actual polling data of the general population instead of a self-selecting sample of young, internet users, the results are rather different...

Ordinary people are just as likely to support policy ideas from the extreme right as the far left.

That fact can provide no more comfort for Corbyn supporters who like to point at popular left-wing policies to prove he is electable than it can for Farage supporters who do the same thing about popular right-wing proposals.

Generali

MS1950 wrote: »

It's good to see that the candidates in the Leadership election and their supporters (and everyone else in the Labour 'hierarchy') are fully following the letter and spirit of the party's 'Code of Conduct'
CONDUCT OF CANDIDATE CAMPAIGNS

3. No candidates or persons acting on behalf of a candidate will use their own material, access to publicity or any media outlets to disparage or brief against any other candidate":

It would be interesting to see the last campaign for Labour leader where they weren't at each others' throats. John Smith I guess, he seemed to be elected without much fuss.

ukcarper

Do people on here people really believe the majority of voters read the manifestos study the policies and make an informed decision on that I wouldn't mind betting that a large percentage couldn't tell you more than a couple of policies.

HAMISH_MCTAVISH

cepheus wrote: »

the public are probably more interested in personalities than policies,

Even the Labour party disagrees with you.

Their very own report into the monumental failings of the 2015 election notes that there is a growing gap between Labour's position and that of the wider electorate, and that Labour risks becoming 'Irrelevant to the majority of working people'.

Increasingly Labour attracts voters who want to see redistribution of wealth from rich to poor but who also hold views that are out of step with the wider electorate.

This reinforces the Inquiry’s finding of a growing cultural divide between the socially liberal, progressive Labour Party and its 2015 voters, and large parts of the electorate who either vote pragmatically or who are socially conservative.

This divide is growing and it is evident across a number of areas that are fundamental to the Party’s electoral prospects: the deficit, the welfare system, public services, personal financial interest, and business.

http://labourlist.org/2015/08/labour-stands-on-the-brink-of-becoming-irrelevant-to-the-majority-of-working-people/

Generali

HAMISH_MCTAVISH wrote: »

Because when you use actual polling data of the general population instead of a self-selecting sample of young, internet users, the results are rather different...

Ordinary people are just as likely to support policy ideas from the extreme right as the far left.

That fact can provide no more comfort for Corbyn supporters who like to point at popular left-wing policies to prove he is electable than it can for Farage supporters who do the same thing about popular right-wing proposals.

From looking at the list I would say that it would be less of a leap for a Farageless UKIP to get to more of that as a manifesto as may be at first apparent. Put the limit up to £250,000 or even £1mil so basically nobody will pay the top rate of tax. Promise to 'come down hard' on utilities and rail companies while subsidising them with the other hand, for example a Government could cap gas prices while providing a very cheap swap facility so utilities could swap their floating gas price exposure, i.e. wholesale prices, to a pre-agreed fixed price.