Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » New large sample poll finds just 43% of GE2015 LAB voters s

SystemSystem Posts: 6,199
edited November 2015 in General

imagepoliticalbetting.com » Blog Archive » New large sample poll finds just 43% of GE2015 LAB voters saying they approve of Corbyn as party leader

This is a new venture by Ian Warren of Election Data who in the run-up to GE2015 provided analysis for two of the main parties. He devised the questions and provided the analysis. YouGov did the fieldwork. The initial release relates to just English adults – other parts are to follow.

Read the full story here


«134567

Comments

  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 18,108
    edited November 2015
    First?
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 18,108
    I wonder in May 2015 what % of Labour voters didn't approve of Ed Miliband - but voted for him anyway? Need that data to compare the effect of Corbyn on Labour chances. But it doesn't look good....
  • Plato_SaysPlato_Says Posts: 11,822
    Abby Tomlinson @twcuddleston

    Absolutely bloody ridiculous than I'm being patronised and had a go at by people in my own party for just TELLING THE TRUTH for gods sake.

    "Work with Jeremy!" I AM WORKING WITH JEREMY YOU MORONS, I'M OUT ON THE DOORSTEP IN HIS NAME WHENEVER I CAN BE

    It isn't my bloody fault that I put all my efforts into trying to win people over to him on the doorstep and they still won't have it.
  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 18,108

    Abby Tomlinson @twcuddleston

    Absolutely bloody ridiculous than I'm being patronised and had a go at by people in my own party for just TELLING THE TRUTH for gods sake.

    "Work with Jeremy!" I AM WORKING WITH JEREMY YOU MORONS, I'M OUT ON THE DOORSTEP IN HIS NAME WHENEVER I CAN BE

    It isn't my bloody fault that I put all my efforts into trying to win people over to him on the doorstep and they still won't have it.

    That's where she's going wrong. Telling the truth. Does she not know how to dream?
  • FensterFenster Posts: 1,605
    FPT @ Cyclefree

    I'm still in shock that Jeremy Corbyn is leader of the Labour party. As someone who was just 19 when Tony Blair came to power I only grew aware of politics through the cool Britannia years when Blair seemed to have reformed Labour and stolen the centre-ground forever. I was thinking yesterday of how Corbyn was viewed during those Blair years. A rebel, a maverick, a socialist, a trouble maker, a disloyal figure of irrelevance. It was unthinkable that he'd ever get to lead the party.

    There is a lovely Corbyn snippet in Chris Mullins' View From the Foothills book about a PLP meeting from Spring 2001 where the Labour manifesto was discussed. After the usual queries from left wingers about nationalising Railtrack, banning Fox Hunting etc Corbyn "read out a wishlist" of what Labour should do when re-elected, "to which Graham Allen shouted out, 'and what about the second week', to general amusement".

    As Cyclefree very shrewdly expressed below, Corbyn's beliefs - to the complete detriment of all other opinions - are sacrosanct to him; akin to religion. That is all very well on the back-benches but politics is about compromise and collective responsibility. So I can't see how Corbyn's intransigent, deeply-held, minority beliefs can ever be suited to leadership of a party which aspires to form a government.

    The longer Corbyn continues as leader the worse it will get for Labour. I am 100% sure about that.
  • 'educaion'

    ??
  • Richard_NabaviRichard_Nabavi Posts: 18,424
    edited November 2015
    I'd be a bit cautious about concluding from those figures that "the more educated you are the more likely you’ll approve of JC", because you need to control for age. Older people on average will have finished their education earlier, given the huge increase in the proportion of those going to university over the last thirty years, which will skew the figures heavily. It's probably more an age effect than an education effect.

    More generally, Corbyn's approval figures will continue to get worse as people stop giving him the benefit of the doubt.
  • FensterFenster Posts: 1,605

    Abby Tomlinson @twcuddleston

    Absolutely bloody ridiculous than I'm being patronised and had a go at by people in my own party for just TELLING THE TRUTH for gods sake.

    "Work with Jeremy!" I AM WORKING WITH JEREMY YOU MORONS, I'M OUT ON THE DOORSTEP IN HIS NAME WHENEVER I CAN BE

    It isn't my bloody fault that I put all my efforts into trying to win people over to him on the doorstep and they still won't have it.

    That's where she's going wrong. Telling the truth. Does she not know how to dream?
    What is the stupid b*tch doing out knocking doors ans sweating blood for her party when she could be behind a keyboard abusing people. Tsk.
  • On why it's a good idea for politicians to sing the national anthem:

    https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CVDh3gdWIAAbfZQ.jpg
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 37,244
    @nicholaswatt: Exc: NEC member @bexbailey6 writes to @jeremycorbyn to say MPs, not NEC, shd decide Syria bombing. Believes terms of @UKLabour motion met
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 31,711
    Only 43%. I guess Ed M was better at getting Tories to vote for him than we thought.
  • Plato_SaysPlato_Says Posts: 11,822
    Along with @Danny565 - she thinks EdM is handsome and sexy.

    A minority view, but well it's one.
    Fenster said:

    Abby Tomlinson @twcuddleston

    Absolutely bloody ridiculous than I'm being patronised and had a go at by people in my own party for just TELLING THE TRUTH for gods sake.

    "Work with Jeremy!" I AM WORKING WITH JEREMY YOU MORONS, I'M OUT ON THE DOORSTEP IN HIS NAME WHENEVER I CAN BE

    It isn't my bloody fault that I put all my efforts into trying to win people over to him on the doorstep and they still won't have it.

    That's where she's going wrong. Telling the truth. Does she not know how to dream?
    What is the stupid b*tch doing out knocking doors ans sweating blood for her party when she could be behind a keyboard abusing people. Tsk.
  • CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 10,212
    FPT: In response to @Madasafish:

    I wasn't disagreeing with you. I think that a belief system which is untethered from the real world and ignores the evidence is more akin to a religion than to politics. The casting out into the outer darkness of anyone who dares question Corbyn, the dividing people into sheep and goats, the outrage at the idea that anyone should dare to question the leader, the view of him as some sort of Messiah who gives people hope and inspiration: all of these seem more akin to the followers of a religion. It's all about faith rather than thought, all about making those who believe feel pure and better than about helping others.

    Were I to close my eyes and listen to the sayings of Corbyn, Abbott and others, transpose a few words and add a Northern Irish accent, I could be listening to Iain Paisley speaking to the faithful and ranting about the Jezebel in the Vatican.
  • Fenster said:

    Abby Tomlinson @twcuddleston

    Absolutely bloody ridiculous than I'm being patronised and had a go at by people in my own party for just TELLING THE TRUTH for gods sake.

    "Work with Jeremy!" I AM WORKING WITH JEREMY YOU MORONS, I'M OUT ON THE DOORSTEP IN HIS NAME WHENEVER I CAN BE

    It isn't my bloody fault that I put all my efforts into trying to win people over to him on the doorstep and they still won't have it.

    That's where she's going wrong. Telling the truth. Does she not know how to dream?
    What is the stupid b*tch doing out knocking doors ans sweating blood for her party when she could be behind a keyboard abusing people. Tsk.
    Is this how it is going to go? One by one, ordinary Labour members who make an actual effort will become fed up and stay at home more and more.
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 45,077
    edited November 2015
    McIRA amusingly playing the good cop role, with the Abbot playing bad cop on Syria. For the SCad of course.
  • I suspect 43% of Lab GE voters will be seen as a high-water mark in a few months time.
  • "Approval % of Corbyn by age those sampled finished their educaion"

    Ooops. Note spelling Education, education, edukashun..

  • CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 10,212

    I'd be a bit cautious about concluding from those figures that "the more educated you are the more likely you’ll approve of JC", because you need to control for age. Older people on average will have finished their education earlier, given the huge increase in the proportion of those going to university over the last thirty years, which will skew the figures heavily. It's probably more an age effect than an education effect.

    More generally, Corbyn's approval figures will continue to get worse as people stop giving him the benefit of the doubt.

    Just because someone has been educated does not make them intelligent or thoughtful or even that they have any common-sense.

    There is a certain type of stupidity that only the highly educated are capable of.
  • Primary evidence of the influence of leftie lecturers and leftie professors.
  • runnymederunnymede Posts: 2,536
    'The more educated you are the more likely you’ll approve of JC as LAB leader'

    Aka kids who have done low quality 'degrees' and have no memory of the 70s and 80s are attracted to this superannuated Trot.

  • Given the way some university students behave on free speech and 'triggering' and suchlike, this is not surprising.
  • Miss Cyclefree, aye. It's similar to mistaking IQ for intelligence (or, worse, common sense).
  • Cyclefree said:

    FPT: In response to @Madasafish:

    I wasn't disagreeing with you. I think that a belief system which is untethered from the real world and ignores the evidence is more akin to a religion than to politics. The casting out into the outer darkness of anyone who dares question Corbyn, the dividing people into sheep and goats, the outrage at the idea that anyone should dare to question the leader, the view of him as some sort of Messiah who gives people hope and inspiration: all of these seem more akin to the followers of a religion. It's all about faith rather than thought, all about making those who believe feel pure and better than about helping others.

    Were I to close my eyes and listen to the sayings of Corbyn, Abbott and others, transpose a few words and add a Northern Irish accent, I could be listening to Iain Paisley speaking to the faithful and ranting about the Jezebel in the Vatican.

    It does appeal to a lot of people who see life as without purpose.The downfall of religious beliefs has left a void. Suddenly you have a Leader who is sincere and worthy of trust.. he won't do a U turn..


    If you look at Corbyn and his followers in that light, you will realise he 's here until 2020 - or he has a medical problem due to stress (He's probably very healthy due to cycling).

    Nor is the Labour Party going to collapse at once. It took the Liberals 10 years .. and they still exist 90 years later..
  • Nitpicking but the chart and headline on education are flawed. Those who are still at school etc are not more educated than those who have graduated. Not only are you ignoring real life education but for instance I have a BSc and an MSc and would be classed on your graph as less educated than an 18 year old still in school.

    Normally when I have seen graphs based on education it is by tiers, not putting incomplete education ahead of completed education. Very bizarre.
  • FensterFenster Posts: 1,605

    Along with @Danny565 - she thinks EdM is handsome and sexy.

    A minority view, but well it's one.

    Fenster said:

    Abby Tomlinson @twcuddleston

    Absolutely bloody ridiculous than I'm being patronised and had a go at by people in my own party for just TELLING THE TRUTH for gods sake.

    "Work with Jeremy!" I AM WORKING WITH JEREMY YOU MORONS, I'M OUT ON THE DOORSTEP IN HIS NAME WHENEVER I CAN BE

    It isn't my bloody fault that I put all my efforts into trying to win people over to him on the doorstep and they still won't have it.

    That's where she's going wrong. Telling the truth. Does she not know how to dream?
    What is the stupid b*tch doing out knocking doors ans sweating blood for her party when she could be behind a keyboard abusing people. Tsk.
    Ah well done to her in putting the grunt work in for her party.

    As a bloke it's difficult to judge EdM's sexual attractiveness but I'd say he is quite charming and very polite and I suppose some women would go for that.

    Women are unpredictable though, my missus - for some bizarre reason - chose me :)
  • Danny565Danny565 Posts: 6,872

    Along with @Danny565 - she thinks EdM is handsome and sexy.

    A minority view, but well it's one.

    Fenster said:

    Abby Tomlinson @twcuddleston

    Absolutely bloody ridiculous than I'm being patronised and had a go at by people in my own party for just TELLING THE TRUTH for gods sake.

    "Work with Jeremy!" I AM WORKING WITH JEREMY YOU MORONS, I'M OUT ON THE DOORSTEP IN HIS NAME WHENEVER I CAN BE

    It isn't my bloody fault that I put all my efforts into trying to win people over to him on the doorstep and they still won't have it.

    That's where she's going wrong. Telling the truth. Does she not know how to dream?
    What is the stupid b*tch doing out knocking doors ans sweating blood for her party when she could be behind a keyboard abusing people. Tsk.
    Point of order! - I said he was handsome-ish in a nerdy way before his nose job :p
  • chestnutchestnut Posts: 7,341
    Corbyn most popular with people yet to embrace adulthood.
  • Danny565 said:

    Along with @Danny565 - she thinks EdM is handsome and sexy.

    A minority view, but well it's one.

    Fenster said:

    Abby Tomlinson @twcuddleston

    Absolutely bloody ridiculous than I'm being patronised and had a go at by people in my own party for just TELLING THE TRUTH for gods sake.

    "Work with Jeremy!" I AM WORKING WITH JEREMY YOU MORONS, I'M OUT ON THE DOORSTEP IN HIS NAME WHENEVER I CAN BE

    It isn't my bloody fault that I put all my efforts into trying to win people over to him on the doorstep and they still won't have it.

    That's where she's going wrong. Telling the truth. Does she not know how to dream?
    What is the stupid b*tch doing out knocking doors ans sweating blood for her party when she could be behind a keyboard abusing people. Tsk.
    Point of order! - I said he was handsome-ish in a nerdy way before his nose job :p

    Pity about his voice.
  • Plato_SaysPlato_Says Posts: 11,822
    edited November 2015
    I'm still chuckling at last night's thread about feminist sexiness or whatever which was discussed at length in increasingly PC terms or not. @GeoffM web browsing did make me :lol:
    Fenster said:

    Along with @Danny565 - she thinks EdM is handsome and sexy.

    A minority view, but well it's one.

    Fenster said:

    Abby Tomlinson @twcuddleston

    Absolutely bloody ridiculous than I'm being patronised and had a go at by people in my own party for just TELLING THE TRUTH for gods sake.

    "Work with Jeremy!" I AM WORKING WITH JEREMY YOU MORONS, I'M OUT ON THE DOORSTEP IN HIS NAME WHENEVER I CAN BE

    It isn't my bloody fault that I put all my efforts into trying to win people over to him on the doorstep and they still won't have it.

    That's where she's going wrong. Telling the truth. Does she not know how to dream?
    What is the stupid b*tch doing out knocking doors ans sweating blood for her party when she could be behind a keyboard abusing people. Tsk.
    Ah well done to her in putting the grunt work in for her party.

    As a bloke it's difficult to judge EdM's sexual attractiveness but I'd say he is quite charming and very polite and I suppose some women would go for that.

    Women are unpredictable though, my missus - for some bizarre reason - chose me :)
  • Miss Plato, feminist sexiness? Is it worth perusing two threads back?
  • FensterFenster Posts: 1,605

    Miss Cyclefree, aye. It's similar to mistaking IQ for intelligence (or, worse, common sense).

    I've think in politics too many mistake passion for logic.

    If those opposing one another took a look at the world through both ends of the telescope, rather than through one end the whole time, more logic would prevail.

    But then what do I know...
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 37,244
    @robfordmancs: Data emerging from @election_data poll suggests Farage couldn't have asked for a better Lab leader than Corbyn: toxic with UKIP demographics
  • 'educaion'

    ??

    'The Mill on the Floss'...?
  • Plato_SaysPlato_Says Posts: 11,822
    Be true to your bromance! @HYUFD is still hoping to elope with Andy Burnham.
    Danny565 said:

    Along with @Danny565 - she thinks EdM is handsome and sexy.

    A minority view, but well it's one.

    Fenster said:

    Abby Tomlinson @twcuddleston

    Absolutely bloody ridiculous than I'm being patronised and had a go at by people in my own party for just TELLING THE TRUTH for gods sake.

    "Work with Jeremy!" I AM WORKING WITH JEREMY YOU MORONS, I'M OUT ON THE DOORSTEP IN HIS NAME WHENEVER I CAN BE

    It isn't my bloody fault that I put all my efforts into trying to win people over to him on the doorstep and they still won't have it.

    That's where she's going wrong. Telling the truth. Does she not know how to dream?
    What is the stupid b*tch doing out knocking doors ans sweating blood for her party when she could be behind a keyboard abusing people. Tsk.
    Point of order! - I said he was handsome-ish in a nerdy way before his nose job :p
  • TGOHFTGOHF Posts: 17,964
    chestnut said:

    Corbyn most popular with people yet to embrace adulthood.

    He's popular with those who like him have never had a real job..
  • Looking at that data, UKIP ought to be dead chuffed with Corbyn as leader.
  • Plato_SaysPlato_Says Posts: 11,822
    It was very amusing - well worth a looksee - I think @The_Apocalypse started it.

    Miss Plato, feminist sexiness? Is it worth perusing two threads back?

  • MarqueeMarkMarqueeMark Posts: 18,108

    Fenster said:

    Abby Tomlinson @twcuddleston

    Absolutely bloody ridiculous than I'm being patronised and had a go at by people in my own party for just TELLING THE TRUTH for gods sake.

    "Work with Jeremy!" I AM WORKING WITH JEREMY YOU MORONS, I'M OUT ON THE DOORSTEP IN HIS NAME WHENEVER I CAN BE

    It isn't my bloody fault that I put all my efforts into trying to win people over to him on the doorstep and they still won't have it.

    That's where she's going wrong. Telling the truth. Does she not know how to dream?
    What is the stupid b*tch doing out knocking doors ans sweating blood for her party when she could be behind a keyboard abusing people. Tsk.
    Is this how it is going to go? One by one, ordinary Labour members who make an actual effort will become fed up and stay at home more and more.
    To be replaced by Momentum's nine folks on a bus...
  • CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 10,212
    runnymede said:

    'The more educated you are the more likely you’ll approve of JC as LAB leader'

    Aka kids who have done low quality 'degrees' and have no memory of the 70s and 80s are attracted to this superannuated Trot.

    Not just kids. Look at all those educated people, in their middle age and later, who supported Communism and continued to do so, despite and in the face of all the evidence, or even because of all the evidence. See, for instance, Eric Hobsbawm - lauded despite his support for one of the most disgusting regimes of the 20th century.

    I think we have to accept that a lot of people are attracted to rubbish ideas - like controlling what others can think or say (as in the "trigger"/"safe space" nonsense - an idea so daft that only a baby who wants to be back in its cot could possibly think it worthwhile) - because they are attracted to power and control (and, if necessary, the violence needed to achieve such power and control). They are against the violence, power and control of the state or the oppressive classes not because they are against these things but because it is not them in charge. And they are attracted to movements which give them the chance to strut around and exercise power and control over others.

  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 45,077
    Which will be over first, the Civil war in Syria or the Labour party ?
  • Plato_SaysPlato_Says Posts: 11,822
    I'd be very interested in the views here of @MyBurningEars - he votes Communist from time to time right now.

    He's a smart chappy and posts some great stuff.
    Cyclefree said:

    runnymede said:

    'The more educated you are the more likely you’ll approve of JC as LAB leader'

    Aka kids who have done low quality 'degrees' and have no memory of the 70s and 80s are attracted to this superannuated Trot.

    Not just kids. Look at all those educated people, in their middle age and later, who supported Communism and continued to do so, despite and in the face of all the evidence, or even because of all the evidence. See, for instance, Eric Hobsbawm - lauded despite his support for one of the most disgusting regimes of the 20th century.

    I think we have to accept that a lot of people are attracted to rubbish ideas - like controlling what others can think or say (as in the "trigger"/"safe space" nonsense - an idea so daft that only a baby who wants to be back in its cot could possibly think it worthwhile) - because they are attracted to power and control (and, if necessary, the violence needed to achieve such power and control). They are against the violence, power and control of the state or the oppressive classes not because they are against these things but because it is not them in charge. And they are attracted to movements which give them the chance to strut around and exercise power and control over others.

  • isamisam Posts: 24,352
    Danny565 said:

    Along with @Danny565 - she thinks EdM is handsome and sexy.

    A minority view, but well it's one.

    Fenster said:

    Abby Tomlinson @twcuddleston

    Absolutely bloody ridiculous than I'm being patronised and had a go at by people in my own party for just TELLING THE TRUTH for gods sake.

    "Work with Jeremy!" I AM WORKING WITH JEREMY YOU MORONS, I'M OUT ON THE DOORSTEP IN HIS NAME WHENEVER I CAN BE

    It isn't my bloody fault that I put all my efforts into trying to win people over to him on the doorstep and they still won't have it.

    That's where she's going wrong. Telling the truth. Does she not know how to dream?
    What is the stupid b*tch doing out knocking doors ans sweating blood for her party when she could be behind a keyboard abusing people. Tsk.
    Point of order! - I said he was handsome-ish in a nerdy way before his nose job :p
    I think he is quite handsome, but not as handsome as the guy on Strictly who dances with the girl from Countryfile... Is he the most handsome man in the world???
  • DearPBDearPB Posts: 364

    Fenster said:

    Abby Tomlinson @twcuddleston

    Absolutely bloody ridiculous than I'm being patronised and had a go at by people in my own party for just TELLING THE TRUTH for gods sake.

    "Work with Jeremy!" I AM WORKING WITH JEREMY YOU MORONS, I'M OUT ON THE DOORSTEP IN HIS NAME WHENEVER I CAN BE

    It isn't my bloody fault that I put all my efforts into trying to win people over to him on the doorstep and they still won't have it.

    That's where she's going wrong. Telling the truth. Does she not know how to dream?
    What is the stupid b*tch doing out knocking doors ans sweating blood for her party when she could be behind a keyboard abusing people. Tsk.
    Is this how it is going to go? One by one, ordinary Labour members who make an actual effort will become fed up and stay at home more and more.
    To be replaced by Momentum's nine folks on a bus...
    I think bussing party members to campaigns around the country might be, ahem, a thing of the past...
  • flightpath01flightpath01 Posts: 4,903
    edited November 2015

    Nitpicking but the chart and headline on education are flawed. Those who are still at school etc are not more educated than those who have graduated. Not only are you ignoring real life education but for instance I have a BSc and an MSc and would be classed on your graph as less educated than an 18 year old still in school.

    Normally when I have seen graphs based on education it is by tiers, not putting incomplete education ahead of completed education. Very bizarre.

    No, I do not think you are nitpicking. The graph clearly shows that the more half educated you are the more likely you are to support Corbyn. The headline seems quite stupid to me.
    Equally the body of the comment says the younger you are the more likely to are to support Corbyn but the graph says support from 15 and under is only 16% but 20+ is 30%. I may be reading this wrong but its not clear to me how.
    In a poll of adults why are we given figures for people under 18, and indeed below 15?

  • sladeslade Posts: 570
    Is Jeremy Corbyn the George Lansbury of our day? After a dreadful General Election in 1931 the Labour party had few leading figures left and Lansbury assumed the leadership. He had a pacifist background and was able to re-enthuse the party and rebuild its membership. However politics became increasingly dominated by foreign affairs. When sanctions were proposed against Italy Lansbury opposed them despite the wishes of the party. Eventually Ernie Bevin accused him of 'hawking his conscience' around the country. Lansbury resigned. Who is the new Ernie Bevin?
  • MP_SEMP_SE Posts: 3,642
    Guido is reporting that Lord Feldman received a memo in the summer of 2014 detailing Clarke's alleged behaviour.

    This contradicts Feldman's claim that he was unaware of Clarke's alleged behaviour until August 2015.

    http://order-order.com/2015/11/30/dynamite-memo-warned-feldman-about-clarke-in-summer-2014/

    Cameron needs to act and sack his close friend Feldman.
  • isamisam Posts: 24,352
    edited November 2015

    Miss Cyclefree, aye. It's similar to mistaking IQ for intelligence (or, worse, common sense).

    Interesting new research on measuring intelligence

    'Scientists have discovered there are three types of stupidity – and one is much worse than the others.

    The first, and by far the worst type of stupidity, according to the study is something known as 'confident arrogance.'

    This is when what someone thinks is their ability to do something outweighs their actual ability to do it.

    The second type of stupidity was 'lack of control', when someone just can't help themselves.

    The final type of stupidity is 'absentmindedness' which can also mean 'lack of practicality', perhaps because they weren't paying attention or weren't aware of something.'


    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-3327684/How-not-look-stupid-Psychologists-reveal-three-types-foolish-behaviour.html


  • Plato_SaysPlato_Says Posts: 11,822
    Last night's thread had a new poster @1666 - I couldn't tell if he was trolling or not - he used lots of !!!

    He thought Corbyn was the Restoration of True Labour and wanted a Lansbury in charge.
    slade said:

    Is Jeremy Corbyn the George Lansbury of our day? After a dreadful General Election in 1931 the Labour party had few leading figures left and Lansbury assumed the leadership. He had a pacifist background and was able to re-enthuse the party and rebuild its membership. However politics became increasingly dominated by foreign affairs. When sanctions were proposed against Italy Lansbury opposed them despite the wishes of the party. Eventually Ernie Bevin accused him of 'hawking his conscience' around the country. Lansbury resigned. Who is the new Ernie Bevin?

  • Nitpicking but the chart and headline on education are flawed. Those who are still at school etc are not more educated than those who have graduated. Not only are you ignoring real life education but for instance I have a BSc and an MSc and would be classed on your graph as less educated than an 18 year old still in school.

    Normally when I have seen graphs based on education it is by tiers, not putting incomplete education ahead of completed education. Very bizarre.

    No, I do not think you are nitpicking. The graph clearly shows that the more half educated you are the more likely you are to support Corbyn. The headline seems quite stupid to me.
    Equally the body of the comment says the younger you are the more likely to are to support Corbyn but the graph says support from 15 and under is only 16% but 20+ is 30%. I may be reading this wrong but its not clear to me how.
    In a poll of adults why are we given figures for people under 18, and indeed below 15?

    No, it's people who left education at 15 - who will be disproportionately older.
  • watford30watford30 Posts: 3,474
    edited November 2015
    DearPB said:

    Fenster said:

    Abby Tomlinson @twcuddleston

    Absolutely bloody ridiculous than I'm being patronised and had a go at by people in my own party for just TELLING THE TRUTH for gods sake.

    "Work with Jeremy!" I AM WORKING WITH JEREMY YOU MORONS, I'M OUT ON THE DOORSTEP IN HIS NAME WHENEVER I CAN BE

    It isn't my bloody fault that I put all my efforts into trying to win people over to him on the doorstep and they still won't have it.

    That's where she's going wrong. Telling the truth. Does she not know how to dream?
    What is the stupid b*tch doing out knocking doors ans sweating blood for her party when she could be behind a keyboard abusing people. Tsk.
    Is this how it is going to go? One by one, ordinary Labour members who make an actual effort will become fed up and stay at home more and more.
    To be replaced by Momentum's nine folks on a bus...
    I think bussing party members to campaigns around the country might be, ahem, a thing of the past...
    How did Saturdays's door knocking and curry trip to Oldham go?
  • Plato_SaysPlato_Says Posts: 11,822
    edited November 2015
    And on cue
    The Stop the War Coalition is opposed to Labour MPs having a free vote on the Syria bombing issue if/when David Cameron brings it to the Commons for a decision. We note Labour conference policy vote on the matter, passed overwhelmingly only two months ago, and feel that all the conditions on this have not yet been fulfilled. We feel that a free vote – in effect giving Labour MPs permission to ignore this conference policy – will detract considerably from its impact.

    In addition, it is becoming increasingly clear that Cameron will use the decision to call a free vote as a green light to call a vote in parliament as soon as this Wednesday. This would make war much more likely.

    No doubt some MPs would rebel against a whip on this issue and vote for bombing in any case. But a free vote will certainly maximise their number and therefore both make it easier for the Tories to secure a Commons majority for war, as well as undermining Jeremy Corbyn’s position and that of the Labour conference. If, on the other hand, Cameron knew that Labour was to impose a whip in opposition to war, this might be sufficient to discourage him from bringing the matter to the House in the first place.
  • Pulpstar said:

    Which will be over first, the Civil war in Syria or the Labour party ?

    Has not the civil was in Labour been going on longer than 'Syria' has been in existence?
  • slade said:

    Is Jeremy Corbyn the George Lansbury of our day? After a dreadful General Election in 1931 the Labour party had few leading figures left and Lansbury assumed the leadership. He had a pacifist background and was able to re-enthuse the party and rebuild its membership. However politics became increasingly dominated by foreign affairs. When sanctions were proposed against Italy Lansbury opposed them despite the wishes of the party. Eventually Ernie Bevin accused him of 'hawking his conscience' around the country. Lansbury resigned. Who is the new Ernie Bevin?

    I did the Lansbury analogy yesterday, I left out the Ernie Bevin part as I couldn't nail down who it could be.

    Alan Johnson was my first thought, but Alan Johnson was an ex trade union boss but Bevin was a current trade union boss when he made his intervention.
  • TOPPINGTOPPING Posts: 13,676
    edited November 2015
    isam said:

    Miss Cyclefree, aye. It's similar to mistaking IQ for intelligence (or, worse, common sense).

    Interesting new research on measuring intelligence

    'Scientists have discovered there are three types of stupidity – and one is much worse than the others.

    The first, and by far the worst type of stupidity, according to the study is something known as 'confident arrogance.'

    This is when what someone thinks is their ability to do something outweighs their actual ability to do it.

    The second type of stupidity was 'lack of control', when someone just can't help themselves.

    The final type of stupidity is 'absentmindedness' which can also mean 'lack of practicality', perhaps because they weren't paying attention or weren't aware of something.'


    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-3327684/How-not-look-stupid-Psychologists-reveal-three-types-foolish-behaviour.html


    reminds me of this:

    http://quoteinvestigator.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/Hammerstein03.jpg

    "Clever and Lazy" are the most sought after and capable type of people.
  • Plato_SaysPlato_Says Posts: 11,822
    :smiley:
    TOPPING said:

    isam said:

    Miss Cyclefree, aye. It's similar to mistaking IQ for intelligence (or, worse, common sense).

    Interesting new research on measuring intelligence

    'Scientists have discovered there are three types of stupidity – and one is much worse than the others.

    The first, and by far the worst type of stupidity, according to the study is something known as 'confident arrogance.'

    This is when what someone thinks is their ability to do something outweighs their actual ability to do it.

    The second type of stupidity was 'lack of control', when someone just can't help themselves.

    The final type of stupidity is 'absentmindedness' which can also mean 'lack of practicality', perhaps because they weren't paying attention or weren't aware of something.'


    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-3327684/How-not-look-stupid-Psychologists-reveal-three-types-foolish-behaviour.html


    reminds me of this:

    http://quoteinvestigator.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/Hammerstein03.jpg

    "Clever and Lazy" are the most sought after and capable type of people.
  • Ian's got a piece coming out in the Guardian in a bit about this that will be worth reading.
  • oxfordsimonoxfordsimon Posts: 3,640

    And on cue

    The Stop the War Coalition is opposed to Labour MPs having a free vote on the Syria bombing issue if/when David Cameron brings it to the Commons for a decision. We note Labour conference policy vote on the matter, passed overwhelmingly only two months ago, and feel that all the conditions on this have not yet been fulfilled. We feel that a free vote – in effect giving Labour MPs permission to ignore this conference policy – will detract considerably from its impact.

    In addition, it is becoming increasingly clear that Cameron will use the decision to call a free vote as a green light to call a vote in parliament as soon as this Wednesday. This would make war much more likely.

    No doubt some MPs would rebel against a whip on this issue and vote for bombing in any case. But a free vote will certainly maximise their number and therefore both make it easier for the Tories to secure a Commons majority for war, as well as undermining Jeremy Corbyn’s position and that of the Labour conference. If, on the other hand, Cameron knew that Labour was to impose a whip in opposition to war, this might be sufficient to discourage him from bringing the matter to the House in the first place.
    They really don't get it.

    This is not a proposal to go to war. It never has been and it never will be.

    The proposal is to extend an existing bombing campaign to a new area in order to help destroy those seeking to bring terror to our country.

    That isn't war. It is limited aerial bombing campaign.

    It is an extension of an existing military action.

    But they don't want to get it. They want to impose their 'conscience' on everyone. Classic appeasement from people with no common sense and no regard for the safety of our citizens and those of our allies.
  • Plato_SaysPlato_Says Posts: 11,822
    edited November 2015
    Mr Kirkup doesn't think Jezza is going anywhere - some great graphs here too http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/labour/12024115/Jeremy-Corbyn-is-a-disaster-for-Labour-but-the-MPs-plotting-against-him-are-worse.html
    More or less the entire British political establishment has told Mr Corbyn he is wrong (and harmful to Labour) for decades, and especially since the summer. Why would he suddenly start listening just because a few (dozen) MPs say so? Or indeed the voters of Oldham?
  • slade said:

    Is Jeremy Corbyn the George Lansbury of our day? After a dreadful General Election in 1931 the Labour party had few leading figures left and Lansbury assumed the leadership. He had a pacifist background and was able to re-enthuse the party and rebuild its membership. However politics became increasingly dominated by foreign affairs. When sanctions were proposed against Italy Lansbury opposed them despite the wishes of the party. Eventually Ernie Bevin accused him of 'hawking his conscience' around the country. Lansbury resigned. Who is the new Ernie Bevin?

    I did the Lansbury analogy yesterday, I left out the Ernie Bevin part as I couldn't nail down who it could be.

    Alan Johnson was my first thought, but Alan Johnson was an ex trade union boss but Bevin was a current trade union boss when he made his intervention.
    Labour is less George Lansbury and more Angela Lansbury. You can allocate the bedknobs and broomsticks according to political taste.
  • Cameron has a 17 majority. Add in DUP that gives 25. SNP are against, as are other smaller parties such as Greens.

    Reports are that only a handful of Tories are now against, but it has to be very tight unless a block of say 20 Labour MPs can be relied on to vote for action.

    There must be 20 Lab MPs who will defy a three-line whip under current circumstances. But can Cameron be certain given the run-around he was given a couple of years ago? I suspect this will fall to Hilary Benn to make the call. If he defies the whip then others will gladly follow and Cameron will feel more secure.
  • felixfelix Posts: 7,681
    isam said:

    Danny565 said:

    Along with @Danny565 - she thinks EdM is handsome and sexy.

    A minority view, but well it's one.

    Fenster said:

    Abby Tomlinson @twcuddleston

    Absolutely bloody ridiculous than I'm being patronised and had a go at by people in my own party for just TELLING THE TRUTH for gods sake.

    "Work with Jeremy!" I AM WORKING WITH JEREMY YOU MORONS, I'M OUT ON THE DOORSTEP IN HIS NAME WHENEVER I CAN BE

    It isn't my bloody fault that I put all my efforts into trying to win people over to him on the doorstep and they still won't have it.

    That's where she's going wrong. Telling the truth. Does she not know how to dream?
    What is the stupid b*tch doing out knocking doors ans sweating blood for her party when she could be behind a keyboard abusing people. Tsk.
    Point of order! - I said he was handsome-ish in a nerdy way before his nose job :p
    I think he is quite handsome, but not as handsome as the guy on Strictly who dances with the girl from Countryfile... Is he the most handsome man in the world???
    isam said:

    Danny565 said:

    Along with @Danny565 - she thinks EdM is handsome and sexy.

    A minority view, but well it's one.

    Fenster said:

    Abby Tomlinson @twcuddleston

    Absolutely bloody ridiculous than I'm being patronised and had a go at by people in my own party for just TELLING THE TRUTH for gods sake.

    "Work with Jeremy!" I AM WORKING WITH JEREMY YOU MORONS, I'M OUT ON THE DOORSTEP IN HIS NAME WHENEVER I CAN BE

    It isn't my bloody fault that I put all my efforts into trying to win people over to him on the doorstep and they still won't have it.

    That's where she's going wrong. Telling the truth. Does she not know how to dream?
    What is the stupid b*tch doing out knocking doors ans sweating blood for her party when she could be behind a keyboard abusing people. Tsk.
    Point of order! - I said he was handsome-ish in a nerdy way before his nose job :p
    I think he is quite handsome, but not as handsome as the guy on Strictly who dances with the girl from Countryfile... Is he the most handsome man in the world???
    He is really drop dead geeooorrrgggeeeooouuusss!
  • felix said:

    isam said:

    Danny565 said:

    Along with @Danny565 - she thinks EdM is handsome and sexy.

    A minority view, but well it's one.

    Fenster said:

    Abby Tomlinson @twcuddleston

    Absolutely bloody ridiculous than I'm being patronised and had a go at by people in my own party for just TELLING THE TRUTH for gods sake.

    "Work with Jeremy!" I AM WORKING WITH JEREMY YOU MORONS, I'M OUT ON THE DOORSTEP IN HIS NAME WHENEVER I CAN BE

    It isn't my bloody fault that I put all my efforts into trying to win people over to him on the doorstep and they still won't have it.

    That's where she's going wrong. Telling the truth. Does she not know how to dream?
    What is the stupid b*tch doing out knocking doors ans sweating blood for her party when she could be behind a keyboard abusing people. Tsk.
    Point of order! - I said he was handsome-ish in a nerdy way before his nose job :p
    I think he is quite handsome, but not as handsome as the guy on Strictly who dances with the girl from Countryfile... Is he the most handsome man in the world???
    isam said:

    Danny565 said:

    Along with @Danny565 - she thinks EdM is handsome and sexy.

    A minority view, but well it's one.

    Fenster said:

    Abby Tomlinson @twcuddleston

    Absolutely bloody ridiculous than I'm being patronised and had a go at by people in my own party for just TELLING THE TRUTH for gods sake.

    "Work with Jeremy!" I AM WORKING WITH JEREMY YOU MORONS, I'M OUT ON THE DOORSTEP IN HIS NAME WHENEVER I CAN BE

    It isn't my bloody fault that I put all my efforts into trying to win people over to him on the doorstep and they still won't have it.

    That's where she's going wrong. Telling the truth. Does she not know how to dream?
    What is the stupid b*tch doing out knocking doors ans sweating blood for her party when she could be behind a keyboard abusing people. Tsk.
    Point of order! - I said he was handsome-ish in a nerdy way before his nose job :p
    I think he is quite handsome, but not as handsome as the guy on Strictly who dances with the girl from Countryfile... Is he the most handsome man in the world???
    He is really drop dead geeooorrrgggeeeooouuusss!
    He is. The moment he took of his shirt a few weeks ago...
  • Scott_PScott_P Posts: 37,244
    @dats: Text from a source on new shadow cabinet meeting time. https://t.co/LH0HfP9Ny1
  • MarkHopkinsMarkHopkins Posts: 5,487

    And on cue

    The Stop the War Coalition is opposed to Labour MPs having a free vote on the Syria bombing issue if/when David Cameron brings it to the Commons for a decision. We note Labour conference policy vote on the matter, passed overwhelmingly only two months ago, and feel that all the conditions on this have not yet been fulfilled. We feel that a free vote – in effect giving Labour MPs permission to ignore this conference policy – will detract considerably from its impact.

    In addition, it is becoming increasingly clear that Cameron will use the decision to call a free vote as a green light to call a vote in parliament as soon as this Wednesday. This would make war much more likely.

    No doubt some MPs would rebel against a whip on this issue and vote for bombing in any case. But a free vote will certainly maximise their number and therefore both make it easier for the Tories to secure a Commons majority for war, as well as undermining Jeremy Corbyn’s position and that of the Labour conference. If, on the other hand, Cameron knew that Labour was to impose a whip in opposition to war, this might be sufficient to discourage him from bringing the matter to the House in the first place.
    They really don't get it.

    This is not a proposal to go to war. It never has been and it never will be.

    The proposal is to extend an existing bombing campaign to a new area in order to help destroy those seeking to bring terror to our country.

    That isn't war. It is limited aerial bombing campaign.

    It is an extension of an existing military action.

    But they don't want to get it. They want to impose their 'conscience' on everyone. Classic appeasement from people with no common sense and no regard for the safety of our citizens and those of our allies.

    They do get it.

    Their name: Stop The West describes exactly what they want.

  • Nitpicking but the chart and headline on education are flawed. Those who are still at school etc are not more educated than those who have graduated. Not only are you ignoring real life education but for instance I have a BSc and an MSc and would be classed on your graph as less educated than an 18 year old still in school.

    Normally when I have seen graphs based on education it is by tiers, not putting incomplete education ahead of completed education. Very bizarre.

    No, I do not think you are nitpicking. The graph clearly shows that the more half educated you are the more likely you are to support Corbyn. The headline seems quite stupid to me.
    Equally the body of the comment says the younger you are the more likely to are to support Corbyn but the graph says support from 15 and under is only 16% but 20+ is 30%. I may be reading this wrong but its not clear to me how.
    In a poll of adults why are we given figures for people under 18, and indeed below 15?

    No, it's people who left education at 15 - who will be disproportionately older.
    Ah. But in a poll are these splits valid? A bit like Scottish sub samples?
    Also - the fact that it is a large sample. We used to be told IIRC that increasing the size of a properly selected sample did not or should not improve its accuracy to any significant degree.
  • HurstLlamaHurstLlama Posts: 9,098
    edited November 2015
    slade said:

    Is Jeremy Corbyn the George Lansbury of our day? After a dreadful General Election in 1931 the Labour party had few leading figures left and Lansbury assumed the leadership. He had a pacifist background and was able to re-enthuse the party and rebuild its membership. However politics became increasingly dominated by foreign affairs. When sanctions were proposed against Italy Lansbury opposed them despite the wishes of the party. Eventually Ernie Bevin accused him of 'hawking his conscience' around the country. Lansbury resigned. Who is the new Ernie Bevin?

    If Labour or any party had a politician of the stature of Bevin they would be elected by a massive landslide and would retain power for as long as that politician lived. He was a giant even in an age of giants and compared to him our current crop of political leaders are a bunch of limp-wristed, shallow weaklings who seek power only for power's sake.

    If memory serves someone once asked Cameron why he wanted to be Prime Minister and he replied, "I think I'd be rather good at it". Can you imagine Bevin ever giving such a self-centred wishy-washy answer?

    Edited extra bit: TSE suggests that Alan Johnson is a politician in the Bevin mould, well only as much a domestic house cat can be compared to a full grown Bengal Tiger. They are both cats in the same way that Johnson and Bevin were both trade-unionists there the equivalence ends.
  • And on cue

    The Stop the War Coalition is opposed to Labour MPs having a free vote on the Syria bombing issue if/when David Cameron brings it to the Commons for a decision. We note Labour conference policy vote on the matter, passed overwhelmingly only two months ago, and feel that all the conditions on this have not yet been fulfilled. We feel that a free vote – in effect giving Labour MPs permission to ignore this conference policy – will detract considerably from its impact.

    In addition, it is becoming increasingly clear that Cameron will use the decision to call a free vote as a green light to call a vote in parliament as soon as this Wednesday. This would make war much more likely.

    No doubt some MPs would rebel against a whip on this issue and vote for bombing in any case. But a free vote will certainly maximise their number and therefore both make it easier for the Tories to secure a Commons majority for war, as well as undermining Jeremy Corbyn’s position and that of the Labour conference. If, on the other hand, Cameron knew that Labour was to impose a whip in opposition to war, this might be sufficient to discourage him from bringing the matter to the House in the first place.
    They really don't get it.

    This is not a proposal to go to war. It never has been and it never will be.

    The proposal is to extend an existing bombing campaign to a new area in order to help destroy those seeking to bring terror to our country.

    That isn't war. It is limited aerial bombing campaign.

    It is an extension of an existing military action.

    But they don't want to get it. They want to impose their 'conscience' on everyone. Classic appeasement from people with no common sense and no regard for the safety of our citizens and those of our allies.
    They do get it.

    Their name: Stop The West describes exactly what they want.



    Both yourself and oxfordsimon are correct. And thank you to Simon for repeating the plain unvarnished facts.
  • slade said:

    Is Jeremy Corbyn the George Lansbury of our day? After a dreadful General Election in 1931 the Labour party had few leading figures left and Lansbury assumed the leadership. He had a pacifist background and was able to re-enthuse the party and rebuild its membership. However politics became increasingly dominated by foreign affairs. When sanctions were proposed against Italy Lansbury opposed them despite the wishes of the party. Eventually Ernie Bevin accused him of 'hawking his conscience' around the country. Lansbury resigned. Who is the new Ernie Bevin?

    I did the Lansbury analogy yesterday, I left out the Ernie Bevin part as I couldn't nail down who it could be.

    Alan Johnson was my first thought, but Alan Johnson was an ex trade union boss but Bevin was a current trade union boss when he made his intervention.
    Labour is less George Lansbury and more Angela Lansbury. You can allocate the bedknobs and broomsticks according to political taste.
    Personally I always thought Jessica Fletcher was a serial killer, I mean how many of her friends died when she was around.

    Then she blamed some poor innocent for her crimes
  • CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 10,212

    And on cue

    The Stop the War Coalition is opposed to Labour MPs having a free vote on the Syria bombing issue if/when David Cameron brings it to the Commons for a decision. We note Labour conference policy vote on the matter, passed overwhelmingly only two months ago, and feel that all the conditions on this have not yet been fulfilled. We feel that a free vote – in effect giving Labour MPs permission to ignore this conference policy – will detract considerably from its impact.

    In addition, it is becoming increasingly clear that Cameron will use the decision to call a free vote as a green light to call a vote in parliament as soon as this Wednesday. This would make war much more likely.

    No doubt some MPs would rebel against a whip on this issue and vote for bombing in any case. But a free vote will certainly maximise their number and therefore both make it easier for the Tories to secure a Commons majority for war, as well as undermining Jeremy Corbyn’s position and that of the Labour conference. If, on the other hand, Cameron knew that Labour was to impose a whip in opposition to war, this might be sufficient to discourage him from bringing the matter to the House in the first place.
    They really don't get it.

    This is not a proposal to go to war. It never has been and it never will be.

    The proposal is to extend an existing bombing campaign to a new area in order to help destroy those seeking to bring terror to our country.

    That isn't war. It is limited aerial bombing campaign.

    It is an extension of an existing military action.

    But they don't want to get it. They want to impose their 'conscience' on everyone. Classic appeasement from people with no common sense and no regard for the safety of our citizens and those of our allies.

    STW don't have a "conscience". That would imply some nodding acquaintance with morality. They think it is our fault we are a target. They are no different to those who think that a woman wearing a short skirt is "asking" for rape.

  • slade said:

    Is Jeremy Corbyn the George Lansbury of our day? After a dreadful General Election in 1931 the Labour party had few leading figures left and Lansbury assumed the leadership. He had a pacifist background and was able to re-enthuse the party and rebuild its membership. However politics became increasingly dominated by foreign affairs. When sanctions were proposed against Italy Lansbury opposed them despite the wishes of the party. Eventually Ernie Bevin accused him of 'hawking his conscience' around the country. Lansbury resigned. Who is the new Ernie Bevin?

    I did the Lansbury analogy yesterday, I left out the Ernie Bevin part as I couldn't nail down who it could be.

    Alan Johnson was my first thought, but Alan Johnson was an ex trade union boss but Bevin was a current trade union boss when he made his intervention.
    The Lansbury analogy can be easily made because it fits so well. For that matter, Cameron and Osborne can be fitted relatively well to the Baldwin and Chamberlain of 1935. But just because they fit, it doesn't necessarily follow that there is a fit for Bevin or Attlee. It wasn't inevitable that Lansbury would be replaced in 1935 any more than it's inevitable that Corbyn will go before 2020. One key difference is in the number of MPs. After the disaster of 1931, Labour was almost certain to make gains and those MPs who did survive MacDonald'd treachery were highly likely to keep their seat; that's far from the case now.

    (In fact, at this stage in the 1931 parliament, Lansbury hadn't even become leader: Henderson, despite having lost his seat, continued to lead the party).
  • felixfelix Posts: 7,681
    isam said:
    I saw that but if you look at the picture it appears to show women on the second row left had side. I don't think it is segregated - altho not sure where the trannies are :)
  • PulpstarPulpstar Posts: 45,077

    Mr Kirkup doesn't think Jezza is going anywhere - some great graphs here too http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/labour/12024115/Jeremy-Corbyn-is-a-disaster-for-Labour-but-the-MPs-plotting-against-him-are-worse.html

    More or less the entire British political establishment has told Mr Corbyn he is wrong (and harmful to Labour) for decades, and especially since the summer. Why would he suddenly start listening just because a few (dozen) MPs say so? Or indeed the voters of Oldham?
    I'm with Mr Kirkup, Corbyn is going nowhere. Any SCad resignations will just be replaced by true believers I reckon.
  • chestnutchestnut Posts: 7,341
    isam said:
    This is the kind of thing that makes me wonder when being a member of Labour becomes completely untenable for people who really do believe in a liberal democracy and equality.

    Labour is gradually drifting into being a conglomeration of Respect and the Greens, and the election of Corbyn will only accelerate that.

  • sladeslade Posts: 570

    slade said:

    Is Jeremy Corbyn the George Lansbury of our day? After a dreadful General Election in 1931 the Labour party had few leading figures left and Lansbury assumed the leadership. He had a pacifist background and was able to re-enthuse the party and rebuild its membership. However politics became increasingly dominated by foreign affairs. When sanctions were proposed against Italy Lansbury opposed them despite the wishes of the party. Eventually Ernie Bevin accused him of 'hawking his conscience' around the country. Lansbury resigned. Who is the new Ernie Bevin?

    I did the Lansbury analogy yesterday, I left out the Ernie Bevin part as I couldn't nail down who it could be.

    Alan Johnson was my first thought, but Alan Johnson was an ex trade union boss but Bevin was a current trade union boss when he made his intervention.
    Another link - Lansbury was chair of War Resisters International from 1937 to 1940.
  • isamisam Posts: 24,352
    felix said:

    isam said:

    Danny565 said:

    Along with @Danny565 - she thinks EdM is handsome and sexy.

    A minority view, but well it's one.

    Fenster said:

    Abby Tomlinson @twcuddleston

    Absolutely bloody ridiculous than I'm being patronised and had a go at by people in my own party for just TELLING THE TRUTH for gods sake.

    "Work with Jeremy!" I AM WORKING WITH JEREMY YOU MORONS, I'M OUT ON THE DOORSTEP IN HIS NAME WHENEVER I CAN BE

    It isn't my bloody fault that I put all my efforts into trying to win people over to him on the doorstep and they still won't have it.

    That's where she's going wrong. Telling the truth. Does she not know how to dream?
    What is the stupid b*tch doing out knocking doors ans sweating blood for her party when she could be behind a keyboard abusing people. Tsk.
    Point of order! - I said he was handsome-ish in a nerdy way before his nose job :p
    I think he is quite handsome, but not as handsome as the guy on Strictly who dances with the girl from Countryfile... Is he the most handsome man in the world???
    isam said:

    Danny565 said:

    Along with @Danny565 - she thinks EdM is handsome and sexy.

    A minority view, but well it's one.

    Fenster said:

    Abby Tomlinson @twcuddleston

    Absolutely bloody ridiculous than I'm being patronised and had a go at by people in my own party for just TELLING THE TRUTH for gods sake.

    "Work with Jeremy!" I AM WORKING WITH JEREMY YOU MORONS, I'M OUT ON THE DOORSTEP IN HIS NAME WHENEVER I CAN BE

    It isn't my bloody fault that I put all my efforts into trying to win people over to him on the doorstep and they still won't have it.

    That's where she's going wrong. Telling the truth. Does she not know how to dream?
    What is the stupid b*tch doing out knocking doors ans sweating blood for her party when she could be behind a keyboard abusing people. Tsk.
    Point of order! - I said he was handsome-ish in a nerdy way before his nose job :p
    I think he is quite handsome, but not as handsome as the guy on Strictly who dances with the girl from Countryfile... Is he the most handsome man in the world???
    He is really drop dead geeooorrrgggeeeooouuusss!
    He sure is... I watched take two at my folks the other day and was quite transfixed
  • Mr. Llama, unfamiliar with this 'Bevin' fellow, as you call him, but I do sometimes wonder how a modern day Hannibal, Trajan, Aurelian or Basil II would behave.
  • EPGEPG Posts: 2,805
    I believe it was Time Cube that coined the phrase, to be "educated stupid".

    Are the education figures conditional on LAB VI?
  • Plato_SaysPlato_Says Posts: 11,822
    I thought this was the killer bit, I think he's spot on - no nostalgia, just the cold facts.
    Think of the philosopher's axe. The name may be the same, but Mr Corbyn's Labour Party is not the one that Mr Blair led. It's not Gordon Brown's party nor even Ed Miliband's. It's Jeremy Corbyn's Labour Party, God help it.

    To many Labour MPs, that fact is just too painful to accept (a lot of journalists don't get it either, incidentally, but that's a story for another day).

    Within the PLP, there has not yet been enough self-examination or self-recrimination among Mr Corbyn's opponents over their failure. And they really, really failed. They failed at politics. They failed to persuade enough members to agree with them. They failed to persuade people to join Labour and back them. They failed and they are still failing.
    Pulpstar said:

    Mr Kirkup doesn't think Jezza is going anywhere - some great graphs here too http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/labour/12024115/Jeremy-Corbyn-is-a-disaster-for-Labour-but-the-MPs-plotting-against-him-are-worse.html

    More or less the entire British political establishment has told Mr Corbyn he is wrong (and harmful to Labour) for decades, and especially since the summer. Why would he suddenly start listening just because a few (dozen) MPs say so? Or indeed the voters of Oldham?
    I'm with Mr Kirkup, Corbyn is going nowhere. Any SCad resignations will just be replaced by true believers I reckon.

  • FensterFenster Posts: 1,605
    isam said:
    This photo will have voters running to UKIP. Those disgraceful blokes should have their women in the kitchen, not at political meetings.

    *ducks*
  • CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 10,212
    chestnut said:

    isam said:
    This is the kind of thing that makes me wonder when being a member of Labour becomes completely untenable for people who really do believe in a liberal democracy and equality.

    Labour is gradually drifting into being a conglomeration of Respect and the Greens, and the election of Corbyn will only accelerate that.

    I think Labour is already half-way there: it is a mixture of Respect and the SWP. Look at the backgrounds of the people around Corbyn.

  • Fenster said:

    Miss Cyclefree, aye. It's similar to mistaking IQ for intelligence (or, worse, common sense).

    I've think in politics too many mistake passion for logic.

    If those opposing one another took a look at the world through both ends of the telescope, rather than through one end the whole time, more logic would prevail.

    But then what do I know...
    In politics, too many mistake intelligence for an ability to run things. Perhaps the two most intellectually capable MPs of the post-war era were Enoch Powell and Harold Wilson. IIRC, one became the youngest full professor in the Empire (at 24?); the other, the first achieved the first starred double first from Oxford in ten years (or something like that). Powell could, perhaps, have become PM but was famously driven mad by his own logic; the other did become PM but underwhelmingly so and ended with a reputation for little more than clever tactics.
  • Mr. Llama, unfamiliar with this 'Bevin' fellow, as you call him, but I do sometimes wonder how a modern day Hannibal, Trajan, Aurelian or Basil II would behave.

    Once again I have to educate you on matters of history

    https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ernest_Bevin
  • Northern Ireland abortion law breaches human rights, it is ruled:
    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-northern-ireland-34963159
  • slade said:

    Is Jeremy Corbyn the George Lansbury of our day? After a dreadful General Election in 1931 the Labour party had few leading figures left and Lansbury assumed the leadership. He had a pacifist background and was able to re-enthuse the party and rebuild its membership. However politics became increasingly dominated by foreign affairs. When sanctions were proposed against Italy Lansbury opposed them despite the wishes of the party. Eventually Ernie Bevin accused him of 'hawking his conscience' around the country. Lansbury resigned. Who is the new Ernie Bevin?

    I did the Lansbury analogy yesterday, I left out the Ernie Bevin part as I couldn't nail down who it could be.

    Alan Johnson was my first thought, but Alan Johnson was an ex trade union boss but Bevin was a current trade union boss when he made his intervention.
    Labour is less George Lansbury and more Angela Lansbury. You can allocate the bedknobs and broomsticks according to political taste.
    I thought it had been established that Ken Livingstone was the broomstick, if only in the morning.

  • isamisam Posts: 24,352
    edited November 2015
    felix said:

    isam said:
    I saw that but if you look at the picture it appears to show women on the second row left had side. I don't think it is segregated - altho not sure where the trannies are :)
    The ginger and the grey? Yes it seems so... Maybe it's just Asian women that are segregated? Or maybe Nuttall has it wrong!
  • runnymederunnymede Posts: 2,536
    'This is the kind of thing that makes me wonder when being a member of Labour becomes completely untenable for people who really do believe in a liberal democracy and equality.'

    Not a problem for Corbyn & Co. I think...Cyclefree's comments earlier are pretty close to the mark (with a some added quotation marks)

    'They are against the violence, power and control of the state or the 'oppressive classes' not because they are against these things but because it is not them in charge'
  • EPGEPG Posts: 2,805

    On why it's a good idea for politicians to sing the national anthem:

    https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CVDh3gdWIAAbfZQ.jpg

    These figures are really intriguing. The 25-39 and 40-59 difference is so stark that it looks like a cohort effect rather than an age effect.
  • slade said:

    Is Jeremy Corbyn the George Lansbury of our day? After a dreadful General Election in 1931 the Labour party had few leading figures left and Lansbury assumed the leadership. He had a pacifist background and was able to re-enthuse the party and rebuild its membership. However politics became increasingly dominated by foreign affairs. When sanctions were proposed against Italy Lansbury opposed them despite the wishes of the party. Eventually Ernie Bevin accused him of 'hawking his conscience' around the country. Lansbury resigned. Who is the new Ernie Bevin?

    I did the Lansbury analogy yesterday, I left out the Ernie Bevin part as I couldn't nail down who it could be.

    Alan Johnson was my first thought, but Alan Johnson was an ex trade union boss but Bevin was a current trade union boss when he made his intervention.
    The Lansbury analogy can be easily made because it fits so well. For that matter, Cameron and Osborne can be fitted relatively well to the Baldwin and Chamberlain of 1935. But just because they fit, it doesn't necessarily follow that there is a fit for Bevin or Attlee. It wasn't inevitable that Lansbury would be replaced in 1935 any more than it's inevitable that Corbyn will go before 2020. One key difference is in the number of MPs. After the disaster of 1931, Labour was almost certain to make gains and those MPs who did survive MacDonald'd treachery were highly likely to keep their seat; that's far from the case now.

    (In fact, at this stage in the 1931 parliament, Lansbury hadn't even become leader: Henderson, despite having lost his seat, continued to lead the party).
    So Labour will win a landslide in 2029?
  • isamisam Posts: 24,352

    Fenster said:

    Miss Cyclefree, aye. It's similar to mistaking IQ for intelligence (or, worse, common sense).

    I've think in politics too many mistake passion for logic.

    If those opposing one another took a look at the world through both ends of the telescope, rather than through one end the whole time, more logic would prevail.

    But then what do I know...
    In politics, too many mistake intelligence for an ability to run things. Perhaps the two most intellectually capable MPs of the post-war era were Enoch Powell and Harold Wilson. IIRC, one became the youngest full professor in the Empire (at 24?); the other, the first achieved the first starred double first from Oxford in ten years (or something like that). Powell could, perhaps, have become PM but was famously driven mad by his own logic; the other did become PM but underwhelmingly so and ended with a reputation for little more than clever tactics.
    His logic was that mass immigration in the 60s would lead to the demographic we now have... And he was called scaremonger for saying it

    He said that demographic would lead to segregated towns, religious factions, and minority demands that would lead to bloody violence...

    It's the reason we are debating bombing Syria yet people still say he was wrong

  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 21,888
    EPG said:

    On why it's a good idea for politicians to sing the national anthem:

    https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CVDh3gdWIAAbfZQ.jpg

    These figures are really intriguing. The 25-39 and 40-59 difference is so stark that it looks like a cohort effect rather than an age effect.
    I think Yougov have some difficulty actually reaching younger voters in sufficient numbers. That means the small number of younger voters who respond to them have to be very heavily weighted up, and that may exaggerate differences in outlook between older and younger voters.
  • Mr. Eagles, that's not history. It's so recent it's practically current events.

    Mr. Fenster:
  • EPGEPG Posts: 2,805
    edited November 2015
    isam said:
    There are obviously women sitting in all areas of that room
    The front is just a row of men sitting together like you would see in Eton or White's
    But Asian so Kippers can have all the angry feels
  • CyclefreeCyclefree Posts: 10,212
    Incidentally, for anyone who thinks that STW was about stopping the Gulf War in 2003, it's worth noting that it was set up on 21 September 2001 i.e. 10 days after 9/11. Its two founders were members of the Socialist Workers' Party with one of them later joining Respect.

    STW is nothing but a front for the SWP and it is using Corbyn's election to take over the Labour party, using the sort of entryist techniques used by leftist groupuscules through the ages.
  • kle4kle4 Posts: 31,711
    If there are still people around who remember it, it isn't history in my book.
  • slade said:

    Is Jeremy Corbyn the George Lansbury of our day? After a dreadful General Election in 1931 the Labour party had few leading figures left and Lansbury assumed the leadership. He had a pacifist background and was able to re-enthuse the party and rebuild its membership. However politics became increasingly dominated by foreign affairs. When sanctions were proposed against Italy Lansbury opposed them despite the wishes of the party. Eventually Ernie Bevin accused him of 'hawking his conscience' around the country. Lansbury resigned. Who is the new Ernie Bevin?

    I did the Lansbury analogy yesterday, I left out the Ernie Bevin part as I couldn't nail down who it could be.

    Alan Johnson was my first thought, but Alan Johnson was an ex trade union boss but Bevin was a current trade union boss when he made his intervention.
    The Lansbury analogy can be easily made because it fits so well. For that matter, Cameron and Osborne can be fitted relatively well to the Baldwin and Chamberlain of 1935. But just because they fit, it doesn't necessarily follow that there is a fit for Bevin or Attlee. It wasn't inevitable that Lansbury would be replaced in 1935 any more than it's inevitable that Corbyn will go before 2020. One key difference is in the number of MPs. After the disaster of 1931, Labour was almost certain to make gains and those MPs who did survive MacDonald'd treachery were highly likely to keep their seat; that's far from the case now.

    (In fact, at this stage in the 1931 parliament, Lansbury hadn't even become leader: Henderson, despite having lost his seat, continued to lead the party).
    So Labour will win a landslide in 2029?
    There's just the little matter of winning World War III first, TSE.
  • Sean_FSean_F Posts: 21,888
    Cyclefree said:

    runnymede said:

    'The more educated you are the more likely you’ll approve of JC as LAB leader'

    Aka kids who have done low quality 'degrees' and have no memory of the 70s and 80s are attracted to this superannuated Trot.

    Not just kids. Look at all those educated people, in their middle age and later, who supported Communism and continued to do so, despite and in the face of all the evidence, or even because of all the evidence. See, for instance, Eric Hobsbawm - lauded despite his support for one of the most disgusting regimes of the 20th century.

    I think we have to accept that a lot of people are attracted to rubbish ideas - like controlling what others can think or say (as in the "trigger"/"safe space" nonsense - an idea so daft that only a baby who wants to be back in its cot could possibly think it worthwhile) - because they are attracted to power and control (and, if necessary, the violence needed to achieve such power and control). They are against the violence, power and control of the state or the oppressive classes not because they are against these things but because it is not them in charge. And they are attracted to movements which give them the chance to strut around and exercise power and control over others.

    Cyclefree said:

    runnymede said:

    'The more educated you are the more likely you’ll approve of JC as LAB leader'

    Aka kids who have done low quality 'degrees' and have no memory of the 70s and 80s are attracted to this superannuated Trot.

    Not just kids. Look at all those educated people, in their middle age and later, who supported Communism and continued to do so, despite and in the face of all the evidence, or even because of all the evidence. See, for instance, Eric Hobsbawm - lauded despite his support for one of the most disgusting regimes of the 20th century.

    I think we have to accept that a lot of people are attracted to rubbish ideas - like controlling what others can think or say (as in the "trigger"/"safe space" nonsense - an idea so daft that only a baby who wants to be back in its cot could possibly think it worthwhile) - because they are attracted to power and control (and, if necessary, the violence needed to achieve such power and control). They are against the violence, power and control of the state or the oppressive classes not because they are against these things but because it is not them in charge. And they are attracted to movements which give them the chance to strut around and exercise power and control over others.

    Generally speaking, the worst rulers of the twentieth century were people of high intelligence. That goes for their propagandists and cheerleaders.
  • Fenster said:

    Miss Cyclefree, aye. It's similar to mistaking IQ for intelligence (or, worse, common sense).

    I've think in politics too many mistake passion for logic.

    If those opposing one another took a look at the world through both ends of the telescope, rather than through one end the whole time, more logic would prevail.

    But then what do I know...
    In politics, too many mistake intelligence for an ability to run things. Perhaps the two most intellectually capable MPs of the post-war era were Enoch Powell and Harold Wilson. IIRC, one became the youngest full professor in the Empire (at 24?); the other, the first achieved the first starred double first from Oxford in ten years (or something like that). Powell could, perhaps, have become PM but was famously driven mad by his own logic; the other did become PM but underwhelmingly so and ended with a reputation for little more than clever tactics.
    Er, the Open University?
  • slade said:

    Is Jeremy Corbyn the George Lansbury of our day? After a dreadful General Election in 1931 the Labour party had few leading figures left and Lansbury assumed the leadership. He had a pacifist background and was able to re-enthuse the party and rebuild its membership. However politics became increasingly dominated by foreign affairs. When sanctions were proposed against Italy Lansbury opposed them despite the wishes of the party. Eventually Ernie Bevin accused him of 'hawking his conscience' around the country. Lansbury resigned. Who is the new Ernie Bevin?

    I did the Lansbury analogy yesterday, I left out the Ernie Bevin part as I couldn't nail down who it could be.

    Alan Johnson was my first thought, but Alan Johnson was an ex trade union boss but Bevin was a current trade union boss when he made his intervention.
    The Lansbury analogy can be easily made because it fits so well. For that matter, Cameron and Osborne can be fitted relatively well to the Baldwin and Chamberlain of 1935. But just because they fit, it doesn't necessarily follow that there is a fit for Bevin or Attlee. It wasn't inevitable that Lansbury would be replaced in 1935 any more than it's inevitable that Corbyn will go before 2020. One key difference is in the number of MPs. After the disaster of 1931, Labour was almost certain to make gains and those MPs who did survive MacDonald'd treachery were highly likely to keep their seat; that's far from the case now.

    (In fact, at this stage in the 1931 parliament, Lansbury hadn't even become leader: Henderson, despite having lost his seat, continued to lead the party).
    So Labour will win a landslide in 2029?
    There's just the little matter of winning World War III first, TSE.
    The United Kingdom is the undisputed World Champion of wars.

    We'll spank ISIS back into the Stone Age.
This discussion has been closed.