Quote: Godot Taxis @ 12th July 2024, 5:29 PMWhat flavour?
Cabbage and Tofu, with just a dash of seaweed sauce - I like to stick to a healthy diet 🤢
General Election 2024 Page 43
Quote: Chris Hallam @ 12th July 2024, 8:26 PMBecause they were different elections, fought at different times, in different circumstances, against different parties with different
voters and different leaders.
This isn't a very persuasive argument Chris, and you must be one of very few people in Britain who think Corbyn could get 12m votes against May, 10m against Johnson (the majority of in-work votes in both cases) but would somehow have got less than 6m against Sunak.
Of course the evidence points the other way when you consider that both Starmer and Corbyn stood in adjacent and safe Labour seats of almost exactly the same size and Starmer managed to halve his majority (the only incoming PM ever to do so) whilst Corbyn got 7K votes more than the official Labour candidate.
Quote: Hercules Grytpype Thynne @ 12th July 2024, 11:26 PMCabbage and Tofu, with just a dash of seaweed sauce - I like to stick to a healthy diet 🤢
I'm more of a 99 man myself.
Quote: Godot Taxis @ 14th July 2024, 6:44 PMThis isn't a very persuasive argument Chris, and you must be one of very few people in Britain who think Corbyn could get 12m votes against May, 10m against Johnson (the majority of in-work votes in both cases) but would somehow have got less than 6m against Sunak.
I'm not saying that. I'm saying we don't know how many people would have voted Tory or Labour because if Corbyn had been leader it would would have been AN ENTIRELY DIFFERENT ELECTION. Probably fought on a different date (perhaps in 2023 or 2025) perhaps with someone other than Sunak as Tory leader and with entirely different results.
Sorry to bang on about this but constructing fantasy scenarios like this simply doesn't work. If you don't believe me, ask someone authoritative about it e.g. the electoral commission and see what they say.
With nurturing this could become the new 'BCG Count To A Million' thread, and still be going in 2029 when Nigel Farage and Suella Braverman form a Conservative-Reform alliance and become the new David Owen and David Steel.
Quote: chipolata @ 15th July 2024, 11:51 AMWith nurturing this could become the new 'BCG Count To A Million' thread,..................
I've tried to resurrect that many a time when I was at a loose end and bored 😒
Quote: Chris Hallam @ 14th July 2024, 7:31 PMI'm not saying that. I'm saying we don't know how many people would have voted Tory or Labour because if Corbyn had been leader it would would have been AN ENTIRELY DIFFERENT ELECTION. Probably fought on a different date (perhaps in 2023 or 2025) perhaps with someone other than Sunak as Tory leader and with entirely different results.
Sorry to bang on about this but constructing fantasy scenarios like this simply doesn't work. If you don't believe me, ask someone authoritative about it e.g. the electoral commission and see what they say.
Lol, 'fantasy scenarios'! It's straight forward postulation from the available data, using what we know and can infer from Corbyn's results and his evident popularity, as well as that of Sunak and Starmer. Stop twisting yourself in knots. Corbyn is not the polarising bogeyman you need him to be nor Starmer's project of tacking to the right the vote winner you imagined.
By the way, your thesis that we can't know because there are too many variables and unknowns defeats your own claim that he wouldn't have won. You don't seem to have realised that.
According to your logic then, we know for certain that Corbyn would have led Labour to defeat against the National Government in 1935?
Or is that just nonsense?
2019 - the tories win GE with majority of 80
2019 - "Jeremy Corbyn is the most unpopular opposition party leader of the past 45 years, according to a new poll.
The survey by Ipsos MORI for the Evening Standard gave the Labour leader a net satisfaction rating of -60, with just 16% of voters pleased with him and 76% unhappy.
That means Mr Corbyn is even more unpopular than former Labour boss Michael Foot, who had an approval score of -56 in 1982, the year before he was routed by Margaret Thatcher in a general election."
2024 - in one of the biggest swings in electoral history- Labour win GE with a majority of 172 seats
Any Labour supporter would be happy that the party is in power against all the odds and the Tories have finally been deposed after wrecking the country
The fact that Corbyn supporters aren't ecstatic about this are pathetic and clearly don't want what's best for the party and the country
Just like Corbyn never gave a f**k about the party and the country- only himself
That loser handed two GE wins to the tories
Therefore he should take responsibility for another half a decade of Tory chaos
He nearly destroyed the Labour Party - thank goodness someone like Starmer was able to clean up his f**king mess - otherwise we could have been looking at 20 years of Tory incompetence
And there's me thinking Starmer was "a friend and a colleague" of Corbyn throughout that time, fully supported the 2019 manifesto and was therefore equally culpable.
That's the sort of nonsense the Daily Mail was spouting ( that didn't work because most people aren't stupid enough to fall for such guff)
Was Starmer supposed to say when questioned at that time "no actually I think Jeremy is an appalling party leader , but mums the word. I'll just be playing along until the inevitable happens and we lose and he gets the chop!"
Yeah cos that's how politics works....
Just like how Dominic Cummings DIDNT come out at the time and express his opinion that Boris Johnson is an absolute f**king idiot who doesn't know his arse from his elbow
Maybe. Although the history of politics in general - and the Labour party in particular - is full of dissidents rebelling against the leadership. But of course you have to have principles to do that.
Nevertheless, having supported the policies in question, and urged the electorate to do so, he can't then absolve himself from all responsibility when it goes wrong. A tactic he was also wont to employ as head of the DPP.
To be fair, though, it must be difficult for him to remember what he supports at any given time; it changes so much.
Quote: Billy Bunter @ 20th July 2024, 7:53 AMMaybe. Although the history of politics in general - and the Labour party in particular - is full of dissidents rebelling against the leadership. But of course you have to have principles to do that.
Nevertheless, having supported the policies in question, and urged the electorate to do so, he can't then absolve himself from all responsibility when it goes wrong. A tactic he was also wont to employ as head of the DPP.
To be fair, though, it must be difficult for him to remember what he supports at any given time; it changes so much.
More Mail and Express type opinions. Starmer seems pretty decent and principled so far.
Quote: Chris Hallam @ 20th July 2024, 10:42 AMMore Mail and Express type opinions. Starmer seems pretty decent and principled so far.
Let's see when we get flooded by illegal immigrants, prisoners are let out early to recommit and more housing built on green belt land. Why don't they just build a few more prisons?
Quote: Chris Hallam @ 20th July 2024, 10:42 AMStarmer seems pretty principled so far.
😲😲🤣🤣
What's so funny?
He hasn't lied to parliament
He didn't say "let the bodies pile high"
He didn't get a police caution
He hasn't broken any laws that he forced onto the rest of us
He hasnt given any dodgy contracts to any of his millionaire buddies
And he didn't tell world war 2 veterans to f**k off cos ITV was far more important