Jeremy Corbyn Vol. 2
Discussion
Mark Benson said:
janesmith1950 said:
Corbyn successfully engaged and motivated a whole section of the electorate who are normally disinterested in politics. Those people, voting for an ideology, are less interested in botched interviews or minutia of budgets or manifesto commitments (see what little harm was done by Corbyn and Abbott both knowing little about their figures when tested).
When someone believes in an ideology, they will defend it in the face of even the most obvious and factual criticism. In fact, the more you criticise it the more entrenched and determined they become. This is why the Tories' mudslinging at the personalities and mistakes of Labour only served to increase the support of Labour.
The only way to defeat it is to put forward a positive message of what you offer for people, and try to engage those remaining who don't have an ideological affinity to your opposition.
This. All day long.When someone believes in an ideology, they will defend it in the face of even the most obvious and factual criticism. In fact, the more you criticise it the more entrenched and determined they become. This is why the Tories' mudslinging at the personalities and mistakes of Labour only served to increase the support of Labour.
The only way to defeat it is to put forward a positive message of what you offer for people, and try to engage those remaining who don't have an ideological affinity to your opposition.
She lost because:
a) She made it about her thanks to favourable polling about her before she opened her mouth in TV interviews. All the posters were "MP's name - working with Theresa May" so we knew we were voting for her.
b) When her personal polling fell through the floor after the debacle of thinking the media and opposition would welcome honest manifesto promises, the only thing the party thought to do was to sling mud at Corbyn.
At no point did anyone think to espouse Conservative values which may have played well with the 25-35 voters starting out in careers and with families - work hard and we'll help you, encourage inward investment and better jobs follow etc.
What you don't do is lurch to the left on policy, alienating many of your core vote, some of whom simply won't turn out (many of the constituencies she lost were only 10s of votes short) and sling mud at the opposition, giving them the upper hand by simply remaining silent.
However, she didn't realise how much of that political capital it would cost her. Then she had nowhere to go. Negative campaigning sounds awful when the other party is offering the moon on a stick.
Another mistake was the whole media interaction. Corbyn stuck with rallies with the faithful. He went nowhere difficult. May went to marginals. Labour organised angry, shouty mobs wherever she or one of her cohorts went. News showed Corbyn surrounded by happy cheering people and Tories chased by a baying mob. Social media was all Labour too. Tories just didn't get it - their core vote doesn't need/use social media but it is now a real influencer and it was left to Labour.
janesmith1950 said:
Corbyn successfully engaged and motivated a whole section of the electorate who are normally disinterested in politics. Those people, voting for an ideology, are less interested in botched interviews or minutia of budgets or manifesto commitments (see what little harm was done by Corbyn and Abbott both knowing little about their figures when tested).
When someone believes in an ideology, they will defend it in the face of even the most obvious and factual criticism. In fact, the more you criticise it the more entrenched and determined they become. This is why the Tories' mudslinging at the personalities and mistakes of Labour only served to increase the support of Labour.
The only way to defeat it is to put forward a positive message of what you offer for people, and try to engage those remaining who don't have an ideological affinity to your opposition.
Which the Tories are incapable of doing, clearly, not least TM. You would get more sympathy from the Manson family. When someone believes in an ideology, they will defend it in the face of even the most obvious and factual criticism. In fact, the more you criticise it the more entrenched and determined they become. This is why the Tories' mudslinging at the personalities and mistakes of Labour only served to increase the support of Labour.
The only way to defeat it is to put forward a positive message of what you offer for people, and try to engage those remaining who don't have an ideological affinity to your opposition.
BigMon said:
Goaty Bill 2 said:
Corbyn is committing assisted political suicide with the help of McDonnell. It is a beautiful thing to see. We should embrace it.
I can assure you good doctor that my children, both well under the age of 35 but old enough to vote, are well enough educated to know to be standing on my side of the barricades 'come the revolution'.
Corbyn, McDonnell and Abbot are all too old to be around in another five years as political threats. Another blissful thought for the day.
You don't need to love Tories in order to hate Marxists.
And I think you and others are absolutely on the mark; the moderate left will turn away in their droves after these few weeks.
I would respectfully suggest it is attitudes along the lines of yours which led Labour to do some much better than expected in the last election.I can assure you good doctor that my children, both well under the age of 35 but old enough to vote, are well enough educated to know to be standing on my side of the barricades 'come the revolution'.
Corbyn, McDonnell and Abbot are all too old to be around in another five years as political threats. Another blissful thought for the day.
You don't need to love Tories in order to hate Marxists.
And I think you and others are absolutely on the mark; the moderate left will turn away in their droves after these few weeks.
It's time for the Conservatives to wake up, smell the coffee, be worried about why Labour, relatively speaking, did so well, and come with strategies to combat them for next time.
TM and the current incarnation of the Tory party is absolute rubbish. It resembles 'Blairism with cutbacks' more than conservatism.
I see TM and Johnson as major liabilities, though I welcome BoJo to continue to pontificate publicly on subjects of his choice as I find him rather entertaining (while and only while he is unable to do actual damage). TM is a separate matter. Her 'snooper's charter' and statements regarding changing Human Rights legislation (please let's not diverge to specifics, there are other threads) has found their way so far up my nose that it would require a surgeon of great expertise to remove them.
Reduction of the liberties of citizens and legal residents are not core conservative values.
I do however fail to see how my (and hopefully many others) utter abhorrence for what the likes of Corbyn and McDonnell have shown themselves to be could possibly assist the labour party, as it is currently constituted?
I personally felt no arrogance or certainty regarding the Tory security of power when they called the election.
I do not suggest the 'death of the Labour party', only that it should be rid of radical Marxists that are well past their sell by date.
They need to grow up and recognise that socialism and Marxism can be distinct. You can be a damned fine socialist without ever reading a word of bloody Marx.
They ignore the simple facts of Marx and Engels having written in the times of oppressive Monarchist regimes, (Russia still had serfs until 1861), and laissez-faire capitalism.
Neither of which is present in modern day Britain.
We need strong Labour socialists as well as strong conservatives. Between the two we have the potential to achieve balanced thinking and action.
stuckmojo said:
kiethton said:
Universal income and 50% tax for all, 75% above a threshold. Every organisation publicly owned, union controlled and personal consumption regulated. Thanks comrade Corbyn
and 100% guarantee that they will still run out of money or build up huge debts with that too. kiethton said:
stuckmojo said:
kiethton said:
Universal income and 50% tax for all, 75% above a threshold. Every organisation publicly owned, union controlled and personal consumption regulated. Thanks comrade Corbyn
and 100% guarantee that they will still run out of money or build up huge debts with that too. Some would probably follow you!!
Jockman said:
kiethton said:
stuckmojo said:
kiethton said:
Universal income and 50% tax for all, 75% above a threshold. Every organisation publicly owned, union controlled and personal consumption regulated. Thanks comrade Corbyn
and 100% guarantee that they will still run out of money or build up huge debts with that too. Some would probably follow you!!
John145 said:
Jockman said:
kiethton said:
stuckmojo said:
kiethton said:
Universal income and 50% tax for all, 75% above a threshold. Every organisation publicly owned, union controlled and personal consumption regulated. Thanks comrade Corbyn
and 100% guarantee that they will still run out of money or build up huge debts with that too. Some would probably follow you!!
A57 HSV said:
I loved some of the comments 
Comment said:
Jezbollah is the People's PM in much the same way Harold Shipman was the People's GP.
Comment said:
As with country that have the words 'Democratic' and 'People's' in their name it is all a big con.
Comment said:
A Corbot recently told me 'Theresa May is not my Prime Minister'.
So I replied 'And Jeremy Corbyn isn't mine. Which one of us do you think is right?'
So I replied 'And Jeremy Corbyn isn't mine. Which one of us do you think is right?'
A57 HSV said:
He has apparently become "the people's PM".I bet quite a few of the 60% of the population who didn't vote for him would beg to differ.
Jockman said:
The top 1% of earners pay 28% of all income tax.
Some would probably follow you!!
I'm not sure the erudite Marxist and Das Kapital exponent, otherwise known as McDonnnell, has ever heard of the Laffer curve. If he has, he doesn't believe the theory as he isn't so much wanting to march off the top of the curve, it's more like a 100mph sprint with the laughable income tax policy he advocates.Some would probably follow you!!
mercGLowner said:
Jockman said:
The top 1% of earners pay 28% of all income tax.
Some would probably follow you!!
I'm not sure the erudite Marxist and Das Kapital exponent, otherwise known as McDonnnell, has ever heard of the Laffer curve. If he has, he doesn't believe the theory as he isn't so much wanting to march off the top of the curve, it's more like a 100mph sprint with the laughable income tax policy he advocates.Some would probably follow you!!
Burwood said:
mercGLowner said:
Jockman said:
The top 1% of earners pay 28% of all income tax.
Some would probably follow you!!
I'm not sure the erudite Marxist and Das Kapital exponent, otherwise known as McDonnnell, has ever heard of the Laffer curve. If he has, he doesn't believe the theory as he isn't so much wanting to march off the top of the curve, it's more like a 100mph sprint with the laughable income tax policy he advocates.Some would probably follow you!!
There is no chance these would pay for the enormous increase in expenditure.
Mind you, scrapping Trident (maybe HS2) would certainly fill a gap.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff