Jeremy Corbyn

it's about acting according to your principles

Which is a luxury denied to Party Leaders and Prime Ministers.

I'd really like to see those studies (and who's behind them).

whom the Tories [b]would most have[/b] feared

I'm surprised you missed that nuance. You often complain about people missing yours.

Bit of a typo that 😆

ernie for once I totally agree. I gave up on that article at the same point for the same reasons.

the reason he is popular is for not 'playing the game'

I gave up on that article at the same point for the same reasons.

How odd.

or even worse getting the China National Nuclear Corporation to build a load of reactors here

he loves them commies, theyll be loving it, probably even offer them some ludicrous fixed tariff

Which is a luxury denied to Party Leaders and Prime Ministers.

Which is one of the things they always get slated for and one of the reasons so many people are switched off by politics.

http://www.crest.ox.ac.uk/papers/p75.pdf

I've read that before and while it concludes that newspapers don't have much influence over election results that's not really the whole story is it. The press set the agenda and the language of debate - and our press is largely small-minded, bigoted, mean-spirited, deliberately misleading, hate-filled propaganda.

The fact that it might not be directly able to influence an election result doesn't mean they don't have a massive pernicious influence, and that isn't really what that study addresses.

with his supports true, but remember he has to get people who voted Tory this year to cross sides to Labour in 2020.

So you admit that his supporters admire his principled stand and lack of spin, whereas Tory voters are morons who lap all that shit up? 😉

i doubt the national anthem thing is as much of an issue as many people (on the right) want it to be.

in the past, if a politician had an affair it would be a huge scandal that would affect their electability. These days most sensible people consider that their policies are more important than their private lives.

It's not the 1950's any more; i think plenty of centrist voters will be able to overlook this, even if they are pro-monarchists.

Mr Woppit - Member

I'd really like to see those studies (and who's behind them).

CREST.OX.AC.UK "http://www.crest.ox.ac.uk/papers/p75.pdf"

"So, over the longer term, newspapers that change their partisanship can, it appears, persuade some of their readers to vote for their party's new allegiance."

"Britain's highly partisan press does have some influence on the way in which their readers vote"

What I don't understand is that it says... "a pro-Labour imbalance in the press in the 1997 election was insufficient to avoid a decline in Labour's overall level of electoral support"
Eh!? That was the landslide Labour victory right?

What I don't understand is that it says... "a pro-Labour imbalance in the press in the 1997 election was insufficient to avoid a decline in Labour's overall level of electoral support"

Eh!? That was the landslide Labour victory right?

based on a very quick scan, it seems to be comparing levels of support for Labour in 1996 vs people who actually voted Labour in 97 after certain papers had switched allegience. And there was a decline overall, but not amongst Sun readers

[img] [/img]

Bias?

At least none of them say 'Corbyn hints that he may be a pedophile'

At least not yet.

Well some of them are a bit dodgy but they all have an element of truth and some such as the Daily Star one about women only carriages or the Mail in working with the SNP are fine.

Also it's a bit silly to think headlines are anything other than adverts for the article. A 6 word headline can never convey any nuanced argument, that's for the body of the article.

It's not the 1950's any more; i think plenty of centrist voters will be able to overlook this,

That's true, but irrelevant since the Labour party aren't after centrist votes, they've repositioned themselves to go after the extreme left.

I wouldn't sing that monarchist dirge either.

me neither

Interesting that political commentators are only now saying that they're not being briefed by spin doctors...and are complaining that he needs to connect with main stream media...Game's changed, and they've not caught up.

Bias?

Nope, they print the same shit about everyone and everything else.

Well some of them are a bit dodgy but they all have an element of truth and some such as the Daily Star one about women only carriages or the Mail in working with the SNP are fine.

Also it's a bit silly to think headlines are anything other than adverts for the article. A 6 word headline can never convey any nuanced argument, that's for the body of the article.

Got any examples of the same thing being done to Burnham, Cooper, or Kendall?

Or Cameron for that matter.

me neither
Interesting that political commentators are only now saying that they're not being briefed by spin doctors...and are complaining that he needs to connect with main stream media...

Good strategy IMHO.

Game's changed, and they've not caught up.

Maybe they'll have to do their jobs and report on actual policy rather than dealing in endless spin.

Plan's working!

Well some of them are a bit dodgy but they all have an element of truth and some such as the Daily Star one about women only carriages or the Mail in working with the SNP are fine.

The one about women only carriages is far from fine. It wasn't even Corbyn's idea. It's dismaying to see how easily people are duped.

Not singing the national anthem is irrelevant in itself. When you put it together with his stance on the IRA it adds up to more of a problem however. He took the oath to join the privy council which as I understand it contains a loyalty pledge which to me shows he has a certain inconsistency.

his stance on the IRA

And what's that?

Maybe they'll have to do their jobs and report on actual policy rather than dealing in endless spin.

If Labour discuss policy then the magic wand will be exposed as fantasy. If by some miracle the magic wand is shown by the cold light of day to be a workable scheme, the current government will just use the magic wand themselves and get the credit.

I predict 3 years of Labour keeping very quiet about their policy, as all opposition parties do.

maybe he really just thinks that someone whos primary residence has 250 bedrooms while the rest of the country grapples with a social housing crisis is an insult to decency

In the old birds defence, 188 of those bedrooms are for staff

"Sandwiches from the mouths of Veterans" 😆

And what's that?

"It's about time we started honouring those people involved in the armed struggle. It was the bombs and bullets and sacrifice made by the likes of Bobby Sands that brought Britain to the negotiating table. The peace we have now is due to the action of the IRA."

They were clearly offered the sandwiches, FFS.

He seems to have a short fuse and I think he'll find it all too much.

Those Downfall YouTube videos are going to keep coming 😉

Thought that quote was from his deputy oob?

In this country we have the mirror and guardian who are left wing/liberal - vs the daily express, the daily mail, the times, the telegraph, the sun, the star - all right wing, mostly rabidly so. That clearly doesn't just reflect existing public opinion, as if it did we would always have a massive Tory majority. It reflects the fact that the media is largely owned by oligarchs who's papers reflect their own self interest.

I disagree, all it proves is that people with left wing views don't buy newspapers, if They did the Mirror and Guardian would have massive circulations

Thought that quote was from his deputy oob?

As pointed out numerous times. Some people just don't want to listen.

Youre right bigndaft, the Barclay bros, Murdoch, Rothermere and Desmond are all rabid socialists 😉

I disagree, all it proves is that people with left wing views don't buy newspapers, if They did the Mirror and Guardian would have massive circulations

Or most folks who buy newspapers do so for the norks, the TV guide, the celeb gossip and the football and barely notice the political bobbins.

[quote=kimbers said]Thought that quote was from his deputy oob?

It wasn't Tom Watson, it was John McDonnell the shadow chancellor.

But not Corbyn, so oobs just spreading lies ?

Right wingers eh, can't help themselves, even the Tory party have been forced to take down their video because its made up !

"Sandwiches from the mouths of Veterans"

More dodgy reporting from Sky...I don't know how many ambiguities there were in that short excerpt. I'd be pretty ashamed as a reporter if I had to say that kind of stuff on TV. I'd also be a bit embarrassed to be linking to that kind of stuff, but I guess it makes a change from posting pictures of Ed Miliband eating bacon sandwiches for you atp. I'm sure you'll find more stuff for us.

[quote=deadlydarcy said] I'm sure you'll find more stuff for us.

You'll be pleased to know that I'm tumescent at the thought.

John McDonnell was on telly last night explaining why he made that statement. He seemed to make sense, if you're not going to go all JHJ-style OOH! Makes you think!

OOH! Makes you think!

You'll be pleased to know that I'm tumescent at the thought.

Well, I'm not at all surprised. I'm sure Guido will provide you with plenty more.

Interesting that political commentators are only now saying that they're not being briefed by spin doctors...and are complaining that he needs to connect with main stream media...Game's changed, and they've not caught up.

The game doesn't change because he won't get his message out as effectively and surely that is his purpose. His style is refreshing in that he is not a sound bite politician of the modern school, so personally I think he is more in need of help because his message is expressed in more words and therefore will be more difficult to get across in short TV packages, which is how the vast majority of the population consume political news. Professional help will useful to him in achieving this. Hiring a "spin doctor" does not mean you are obsessed with spin, it is just a liaison between you and the press.

I'm sure many in his situation would be busy training to do that ****ing annoying delivery a la Blair and Cameron with the accompanying hands. I'm not sure he's one for that kind of frippery though - his speech to the TUC conference was full of good stuff today (IMO), but I was saddened by the comments (look, this was 5Live, so I accept it's not exactly representative) referring to his delivery meaning that he was utterly useless at everything. In the world.

oobs just spreading lies ?

I hope not. Quote any innacurate post I've made and I'll apologise and retract it.

From the "Threat to national security" thread...

outofbreath - Member - Block User - Quote
If the leader really does condemn IRA violence I trust he'll be sacking his Shadow Chancellor:

"It's about time we started honouring those people involved in the armed struggle. It was the bombs and bullets and sacrifice made by the likes of Bobby Sands that brought Britain to the negotiating table. The peace we have now is due to the action of the IRA."

(AFAIK, he has explained why he said what he said and accepts that he could have worded it better. I realise that's not good enough for everyone and that a politician must live and die by every single sentence he says, even ones twelve years ago when a peace process was close to collapse.)

And in answer to my question to jambalaya (i.e. what's JC's stance on the IRA) you quote:

outofbreath - Member - Block User - Quote
And what's that?
"It's about time we started honouring those people involved in the armed struggle. It was the bombs and bullets and sacrifice made by the likes of Bobby Sands that brought Britain to the negotiating table. The peace we have now is due to the action of the IRA."

But, curiously, you don't mention that this is quote is not JC's.

[Apologies for cross thread stalking.]

Cassette boy will educate you....