Don't vote Tory

[p.pete]

Just now, eFestivals said:

There was actually a bigger youngsters turnout last time than there was for clegg - tho not much different, both low 40s%.

Current polling is showing 65%-ish saying they'll vote, similar-ish to the norm.

Take your pick.

(Yougov polls are taking them at their word, which is why the yougov polls show a lesser gap to the tories than other polls)

Yeah, but there's a difference between engaged-youths who've registered to complete yougov polls and freshly-signed-up-to-vote-youths.  I wouldn't dream that all of the later would vote, maybe they'll even bring down the proportion of the age-bracket who do vote, but I reckon yougov don't have much valid info ahead of what actually happens

[eFestivals]

Just now, Scruffylovemonster said:

Also surely depends where they are. 

And does anyone know who the "yoof" are likeley to vote for if they do show up. 

polling says about 80% of 18-24s claim they'll vote Labour if they're voting, I think it was.

 

[eFestivals]

3 minutes ago, Spindles said:

I'm certainly aware of previously LibDem, UKIP and Green supporters in my peer group who have really got behind Corbyn in recent weeks. 

they're not the votes he needs to win. He needs to take votes from the tories, and there's not too much evidence of that happening at the mo.

[arcade fireman]

17 minutes ago, eFestivals said:

I expect there to be a late swing to the tories but whether we'll see it in polls is another thing. We didn't last time, and if there's something to the shy tories thing it's still here.

There's a real danger of the excitement blinding people to the fact that Labour are not doing better than in the last election.

There is a possibility Labour could force a hung Parliament. I would say it's still less likely and we will see a 50 seat Tory majority, but a lot of it depends on factors which people aren't sure how to adjust for. 

If Labour do force a hung Parliament, Corbyn supporters could reasonably claim that as justification for JC to stay, with a revitalised leadership and a PM on the rocks. I'd still have my doubts he could convince the remaining Tory swing voters needed to win a GE, but he'll have earned it.

However I still think we will get a Tory victory but not as bad as first thought, TM with a clear majority and emboldened after seeing off the doubters, Corbyn supporters trying to point to vote % as if that really matters and us all being back to where we were before this pointless exercise kicked off.

I dearly hope I'm wrong. 

[p.pete]

1 minute ago, eFestivals said:

they're not the votes he needs to win. He needs to take votes from the tories, and there's not too much evidence of that happening at the mo.

He needs any vote he can get.  If left support galvanises behind one party then I'd see that as hugely positive.  If youkip (or LDs) can take anything from tories then that's of great help - the fact that they haven't been is a large part of the tories open goal for this election.

[eFestivals]

1 minute ago, p.pete said:

Yeah, but there's a difference between engaged-youths who've registered to complete yougov polls and freshly-signed-up-to-vote-youths.

Yep. That 'engaged' factor will distort the polling across all age groups, and is likely to cause a bigger distortion for the young who vote less.

 

1 minute ago, p.pete said:

 I wouldn't dream that all of the later would vote, maybe they'll even bring down the proportion of the age-bracket who do vote, but I reckon yougov don't have much valid info ahead of what actually happens

stuff like turnout that gets factored into all polls after the raw data is collected can only ever be a prediction. In theory what happened last time should be a strong indicator, but of course every election is very different to then cause differences in voter behaviour.

[Spindles]

In my constituency they are definitely votes we need to win.  The green vote is negligible here but from the last election Libdems and UKIP polled around 2/3 of the vote Labour did last time round.  I am fairly certain that both locally and nationally the party has done a good job of winning over floating voters here, whether it is enough to unseat the Tories is another matter (our incumbent MP had become extremely unpopular and has stood down, the Tories are bussing in someone from outside the area as a candidate).

 

[eFestivals]

4 minutes ago, p.pete said:

He needs any vote he can get. 

That doesn't really work. The 'traditional' leftish vote is smaller than the traditional rightish vote at the mo.

Plus, a vote taken from the tories is worth twice as much in closing the gap to the tories.

[p.pete]

Just now, eFestivals said:

That doesn't really work. The 'traditional' leftish vote is smaller than the traditional rightish vote at the mo.

Plus, a vote taken from the tories is worth twice as much in closing the gap to the tories.

I don't disagree with you - ukip having helped drag politics to the right for years and then suddenly pretty much collapsing pretty much gives them the right pretty much.  Lib dems could win some votes via being more central - but I think most of the right-central votes they could conceivably go after are probably people pro-brexit, so they're unlikely to achieve much traction, and seem to be doing poorly.  Labour have gone leftwards - so are unlikely win any right-leaning voters, shy tories or otherwise.  

I see Labours only real chance being if they hoover up the left-vote; and enough pro-brexiters who want it, but just don't like the tory brexit vision; and enough remainers willing to hold their nose for a pro-but-softer-brexit party.  All these things happening, plus a low turnout from traditional tory voters.  That's all a bit contrived, I'm pesimistic, but I do think the political landscape is a bit fractured at the moment - yes there's red v blue, but also leave v remain and also maybe tin-foil hat wearers v the good press-reading citizens.

[eFestivals]

1 minute ago, p.pete said:

plus a low turnout from traditional tory voters.

there's little to suggest that'll happen - but even if it did, while it might bring victory, it's not an endorsement of what Labour want to do, it's a consequence of May being shit.

[p.pete]

1 minute ago, eFestivals said:

there's little to suggest that'll happen - but even if it did, while it might bring victory, it's not an endorsement of what Labour want to do, it's a consequence of May being shit.

The only party conceivably walking away with an endorsement are the torys.  They're the only party who can win big.  The only other options are narrow margins, hung parliaments and or coalitions.

Yes, I'll go away and have a think about why we're in that situation.

[Supernintendo Chalmers]

Possibly the greatest thing on the internet. Ever.

BBK has a new member...

 

[p.pete]

5 minutes ago, SPTFRE said:

Possibly the greatest thing on the internet. Ever.

BBK has a new member...

 

Can this be next week's number 1?

[zahidf]

Corbyn has the metal fans vote

[The Red Telephone]

3 minutes ago, zahidf said:

Corbyn has the metal fans vote

Is that the first time a politician has been on the front cover of a music magazine since Embrace failed to bring down the Blair government?

 

 

[Mr.Tease]

1 hour ago, arcade fireman said:

There is a possibility Labour could force a hung Parliament. I would say it's still less likely and we will see a 50 seat Tory majority, but a lot of it depends on factors which people aren't sure how to adjust for. 

If Labour do force a hung Parliament, Corbyn supporters could reasonably claim that as justification for JC to stay, with a revitalised leadership and a PM on the rocks. I'd still have my doubts he could convince the remaining Tory swing voters needed to win a GE, but he'll have earned it.

However I still think we will get a Tory victory but not as bad as first thought, TM with a clear majority and emboldened after seeing off the doubters, Corbyn supporters trying to point to vote % as if that really matters and us all being back to where we were before this pointless exercise kicked off.

I dearly hope I'm wrong. 

I'm not sure I like the idea of another long leadership fight immediately after the election as it will let May off the hook and allow her to re-compose herself and set the agenda- don't want a repeat of the aftermath of the referendum. At least give it a couple of months to take stock.

Realistically, the best we can hope for is a hung parliament or the Tories only picking up a handful of extra seats, which I'll settle for (I think that makes the tories very vulnerable if the brexit talks go bad.

One thing I like at the moment is the goodwill in the labour party- no infighting, everyone working together, i have no appetite for returning to animosity and letting the Tories off the hook. 

[arcade fireman]

32 minutes ago, Mr.Tease said:

I'm not sure I like the idea of another long leadership fight immediately after the election as it will let May off the hook and allow her to re-compose herself and set the agenda- don't want a repeat of the aftermath of the referendum. At least give it a couple of months to take stock.

Realistically, the best we can hope for is a hung parliament or the Tories only picking up a handful of extra seats, which I'll settle for (I think that makes the tories very vulnerable if the brexit talks go bad.

One thing I like at the moment is the goodwill in the labour party- no infighting, everyone working together, i have no appetite for returning to animosity and letting the Tories off the hook. 

If the Tories win a majority of 30-40 seats or more Corbyn will have to go. Losing a GE and losing seats means your position should be untenable. So I think if he holds on there will be justified anger from some quarters.

If it's a hung Parliament or if Labour slightly improve it's reasonable for him to hold the fort and carry on, even if he would've still likely lost the election. 

[Mr.Tease]

1 minute ago, arcade fireman said:

If the Tories win a majority of 30-40 seats or more Corbyn will have to go. Losing a GE and losing seats means your position should be untenable. So I think if he holds on there will be justified anger from some quarters.

If it's a hung Parliament or if Labour slightly improve it's reasonable for him to hold the fort and carry on, even if he would've still likely lost the election. 

I think the rumours about him holding on are mainly so he can get the NEC changes sorted (think they're due at the party conference)

[arcade fireman]

21 minutes ago, Mr.Tease said:

I think the rumours about him holding on are mainly so he can get the NEC changes sorted (think they're due at the party conference)

Yeah, some people would be rightly annoyed at that too. I suspect the election breakdown will tell us Labour would have probably won this election had they attracted a few 2015 Tory voters to come across the aisle - I think it'll tell us this is the only group Labour won't have made gains from - despite it being the single most important group to attract in terms of the numbers.

Therefore putting Labour's entire future in the hands of the members who are a long way from those voters would be a very bad move. 

[Mr.Tease]

1 minute ago, arcade fireman said:

Yeah, some people would be rightly annoyed at that too. I suspect the election breakdown will tell us Labour would have probably won this election had they attracted a few 2015 Tory voters to come across the aisle - I think it'll tell us this is the only group Labour won't have made gains from - despite it being the single most important group to attract in terms of the numbers.

Therefore putting Labour's entire future in the hands of the members who are a long way from those voters would be a very bad move. 

At the same time I think the members decision in the leadership election helped labour reconnect with a lot of their former voters who had become alienated. They also helped plumpen the party finances and have provided a lot more people to help canvass and leaflet. They deserve a big say on our future. Furthermore they were right on the policies- the policies are popular, there was more scope for some more leftwing ideas. I think we can all learn something from this in that all factions had truths- just piecing them together that's the tricky bit. 

[uscore]

How do Tories feel about this kind of thing

 

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/jun/02/labour-accuses-tories-of-fake-news-over-video-of-corbyn-ira-comments

Quote

 

It includes a clip from Corbyn’s appearance on Sky News last month when interviewer Sophy Ridge asked whether he could “condemn unequivocally the IRA”. The Labour leader said: “Look, bombing is wrong, all bombing is wrong, of course I condemn it.” Ridge responded: “But you’re condemning all bombing, can you condemn the IRA without equating it to.” Corbyn said: “No.”

The clip was cut off there but the full quote was: “No, I think what you have to say is all bombing has to be condemned and you have to bring about a peace process. Listen, in the 1980s Britain was looking for a military solution, it clearly was never going to work. Ask anyone in the British army at the time … I condemn all the bombing by the loyalists and the IRA.”

 

 

 

Are you ok with such obvious lying?  Such obvious fake news?  It's not even subtle.  They are basically banking on the fact some Tories will see the edited video and believe it without double checking. But what about the Tories who know that it's a fake, a complete misquote designed to manipulate?  

Is it ok "because it's the kind of thing he would say?"  or "well everyone in politics does this?"

Is it not awful?  do you not think "if they are lying so openly about this, what else are they misleading me on?

Edited June 2, 2017 by uscore

[EasyUserName]

6 minutes ago, uscore said:

... do you not think "if they are lying so openly about this, what else are they misleading me on? ...

That's a general rule to apply to all political parties I would say.

[Mr.Tease]

2 minutes ago, uscore said:

How do Tories feel about this kind of thing

 

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/jun/02/labour-accuses-tories-of-fake-news-over-video-of-corbyn-ira-comments

 

 

Are you ok with such obvious lying?  Such obvious fake news?  It's not even subtle.  They are basically banking on the fact some Tories will see the edited video and believe it without double checking. But what about the Tories who know that it's a fake, a complete misquote designed to manipulate?  

Is it ok "because it's the kind of thing he would say?"  or "well everyone in politics does this?"

Is it not awful?  do you not think "if they are lying so openly about this, what else are they misleading me on?

It's just one blatant lie among many that the Tory press, party and leader have been throwing for days, weeks, months, years. Laura Kuessenberg (BBC politics chief) edited a Corbyn interview and pasted an answer to a different question- the BBC defended her saying she did nothing wrong! How do you stick an answer on to a different question and make out that's anything other than blatant lying? (that famous clip when he was made to look like he'd said he wouldn't back a shoot to kill policy in the midst of a terrorist when in actual fact he said he would in an attack, but not as a general, non-emergency situation)

[uscore]

1 minute ago, EasyUserName said:

That's a general rule to apply to all political parties I would say.

sure, but most parties aren't quite so blatant for it.  I actually think it shows utter contempt for Tory voters.  It's saying they are either idiots or complicit in lying.

Edited June 2, 2017 by uscore

[arcade fireman]

1 minute ago, Mr.Tease said:

At the same time I think the members decision in the leadership election helped labour reconnect with a lot of their former voters who had become alienated. They also helped plumpen the party finances and have provided a lot more people to help canvass and leaflet. They deserve a big say on our future. Furthermore they were right on the policies- the policies are popular, there was more scope for some more leftwing ideas. I think we can all learn something from this in that all factions had truths- just piecing them together that's the tricky bit. 

They were right about how to attract Lib Dems/Greens etc. The problem is that isn't usually enough to win an election. Without attracting a fair percentage of people who voted Tory last time it's very difficult to win power. Next election the well of non Tory voters will have run dry. This is the closest we have been to a 2 Party state since the 70s.

Next election Labour will need to pull a bunch of votes from the Tories.  Do you think a combination of MPs and members would be the best way to do this (as is the current system)? Or do you think giving members free rein would be? Plenty can't fathom why people keep voting Tory year in year out. They know a lot about how to appeal to people like them but very little about how to appeal to the other side.

I think you're right about all factions learning truths. But all I can see if Corbyn stays just to try and change the rules is that his faction wouldn't have learned anything. They will try and take matters entirely into their own hands.

If it's a hung Parliament then Corbyn hanging on wouldn't necessarily be so bad, but even then he'd need to pull a bunch of people over who saw his message this time and still voted for the Tories with a lacklustre campaign and a god awful leader. I'd still be sceptical but willing to give him a shot.