Current Affairs Labour and Anti Semitism.......

[Bruce Wayne]

Sure. But I think it was actually Novotny who famously said "are we still giving 'what people think is best' any credibility at all?" ; )

I thought it was Henry Ford Joking aside though, there are 'strategic' things and 'tactical' things. The Czech people in 68 simply wanted to be free. They weren't saying they want specific policies, just to be free from Soviet shackles. From Henry Ford to Steve Jobs, no end of business folk who have been very successful at giving people what they want suggest that the last thing you should do is actually ask them.

 

[tsubaki]

There isn't. There's simply more people annoyed with the incompetence of the Tories and a fraction of them are swinging over.

Hence my argument for the centre-left winning elections by default in Britain right now, because loads of Tory voters would have switched sides given a viable alternative. It's largely common sense - have a palatable alternative and people will stop voting for the party that is crap and give the alternative a bash.

And no, not construction workers - they aren't the issue. The reason that swing isn't happening is because Britain is predominantly middle class and the middle classes are seeing nothing but a hard left nutjob who'd destroy the economy and leave the country worse for them and their children. This is why May has held consistent leads over Corbyn in personal favourability ratings pretty much forever.

Not sure how you square that post with your post #698 above.

Why is Corbyn seen as "a hard left nutjob who'd destroy the economy and leave the country worse for them and their children"? Because that is what people have been repeatedly told - its exactly the same as your point about coffee.

 

[Tubey]

Not sure how you square that post with your post #698 above.

Why is Corbyn seen as "a hard left nutjob who'd destroy the economy and leave the country worse for them and their children"? Because that is what people have been repeatedly told - its exactly the same as your point about coffee.

?

I don't think you've understood the point - people will say when asked that they prefer Corbyn-led Labour policies as they (at least on the surface) help the disadvantaged and it's the 'correct' answer that they believe society wants them to give - e.g. the rich dark roast coffee.

But when they're in a polling booth they'll vote for what benefits them and their families - e.g. what they actually want, which is the 'milky coffee' of not having a hard left winger who does nothing for them.

 

[abelard]

?

I don't think you've understood the point - people will say when asked that they prefer Corbyn-led Labour policies as they (at least on the surface) help the disadvantaged and it's the 'correct' answer that they believe society wants them to give - e.g. the rich dark roast coffee.

But when they're in a polling booth they'll vote for what benefits them and their families - e.g. what they actually want, which is the 'milky coffee' of not having a hard left winger who does nothing for them.

Except that all the polls reported a Tory landslide because people claimed they didn't want to vote for a hard left winger, only for them to enter the polling booths to deliver the biggest vote swing to said hard left winger in 70 years?

Mate.... please. Quit while you're... if not ahead then at least less behind

Or at least find a metaphor that actually works in your favour

 

[tsubaki]

?

I don't think you've understood the point - people will say when asked that they prefer Corbyn-led Labour policies as they (at least on the surface) help the disadvantaged and it's the 'correct' answer that they believe society wants them to give - e.g. the rich dark roast coffee.

But when they're in a polling booth they'll vote for what benefits them and their families - e.g. what they actually want, which is the 'milky coffee' of not having a hard left winger who does nothing for them.

Tubey you said "This is why May has had consistent leads over Corbyn in personal favourability ratings pretty much ever" - ie: people are being asked in polls that don't matter. They answer with what they have been told, the 'correct' answer that society wants them to give.

When they were in the privacy of the voting booth, when their families and them are the ones who are affected, they did answer differently - hence why Corbyn and his party did far better than the polling, especially the personal favourability polling, indicated he would. I am not sure you can read the difference in the 2017 polls and GE result in any other way.

 

[roydo]

He still lost though.

 

[abelard]

He still lost though.

Of course. But the original point is that Britain is not all that right-wing, if you look at support for the actual policies (and not just the map that renders sparsely-populated elderly rural Tory shires ten times larger than densely-populated middle-class Labour cities).

 

[Tubey]

Tubey you said "This is why May has had consistent leads over Corbyn in personal favourability ratings pretty much ever" - ie: people are being asked in polls that don't matter. They answer with what they have been told, the 'correct' answer that society wants them to give.

When they were in the privacy of the voting booth, when their families and them are the ones who are affected, they did answer differently - hence why Corbyn and his party did far better than the polling, especially the personal favourability polling, indicated he would. I am not sure you can read the difference in the 2017 polls and GE result in any other way.

You are confusing focus groups and anonymous polling. Abelard's example was specifically about focus groups.

Anonymous polling has margins of error and some social desirability bias but nowhere near the same amount as a focus group.

 

[Tubey]

Except that all the polls reported a Tory landslide because people claimed they didn't want to vote for a hard left winger, only for them to enter the polling booths to deliver the biggest vote swing to said hard left winger in 70 years?

Mate.... please. Quit while you're... if not ahead then at least less behind

Or at least find a metaphor that actually works in your favour

Haha you posted the focus group example and I tore it to shreds instantly, because you really, really shouldn't be using focus groups to make a point about anything.

Don't then tell me to use something that 'actually works' when presenting that info as your smoking gun! lollollol

The swing to Corbyn was because he was masterful on the campaign trail, truly exceptional. I've always said as such. That was what got him close.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-2017-39856354

Again, all the evidence of that I need right there - a calamity before the election is announced, when he campaigns they fly up, after the election they stagnate, despite the Tory collapse internally.

So the question is now - has Corbyn peaked, or would he get a similar boost from another GE campaign. Time will tell I guess.

 

[roydo]

Of course. But the original point is that Britain is not all that right-wing, if you look support for at the actual policies (and not just the map that renders sparsely-populated elderly rural Tory shires ten times larger than densely-populated middle-class Labour cities).

Trouble is, as much as activists in any party enjoy their own echo chamber, and fume at those that do not share their convictions, most folk are not that arsed.

Any electable party has to appeal to the not that arsed. Cameron did. Blair did, even Paddy Ashdown did. (not that he got power, but the LD's did ok under him) Corbyn, despite your polls and policy focus groups, didnt.

Maybe he will next time. If he doesnt, he will be consigned to the bin marked "Most useless Labour leader ever"

 

[abelard]

Trouble is, as much as activists in any party enjoy their own echo chamber, and fume at those that do not share their convictions, most folk are not that arsed.

Any electable party has to appeal to the not that arsed. Cameron did. Blair did, even Paddy Ashdown did. (not that he got power, but the LD's did ok under him) Corbyn, despite your polls and policy focus groups, didnt.

Maybe he will next time. If he doesnt, he will be consigned to the bin marked "Most useless Labour leader ever"

Yes... I was trying to explain the very same point last night.

On GOT Current Affairs, I'm always either Blair or Chavez. Sigh....

 

[tsubaki]

You are confusing focus groups and anonymous polling. Abelard's example was specifically about focus groups.

Anonymous polling has margins of error and some social desirability bias but nowhere near the same amount as a focus group.

Maybe not, but it clearly happened in most polls conducted before the actual election. You can even see its effect in your posts, and Roydo's #715 above in which Corbyn is a candidate for "Most useless Labour leader ever" (as if Ramsay Macdonald, Michael Foot, Kinnock, Gordon Brown or Ed Miliband didn't exist).

 

[roydo]

Yes... I was trying to explain the very same point last night.

On GOT Current Affairs, I'm always either Blair or Chavez. Sigh....

Sake. I made a post agreeing with someone. What a waste.

 

[roydo]

Roydo's #715 above in which Corbyn is a candidate for "Most useless Labour leader ever"

The context was against the opposition, (sic), he has been up against. Hardly a vintage Tory target is it?

 

[abelard]

Haha you posted the focus group example and I tore it to shreds instantly

Well, you certainly tried, but ended up getting hopelessly tangled, dislocating a shoulder, and your mum had to come rescue you with scissors

The swing to Corbyn was because he was masterful on the campaign trail, truly exceptional. I've always said as such. That was what got him close.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-2017-39856354

Not least because then the election impartiality rules kick in, and voters actually learned that Corbyn a) endorses the policies they support and b) is not a member of Hamas and the IRA