To ask - Jeremy Corbyn - PM

[MommaGee]

There's stuff about how he thinks he'll be PM in 6 months. How the GLASTO coverage is a BBC plot to "see a MARXIST in power" etc etc but how?
TM is hardly going to call another election and Labor are likely to keep her long enough to get through the crap that is Brexit.

Apologies for all those thinking in thick but I don't see how JC has any even inkling of getting it, let alone a discussion on how much swing he'd need

'As for the world's tiniest violin, that's the sort of dismissive nonsense that I have learned to expect from Jezsus fans who do a good line in virtue signalling but little else.'

So many tory plants, so little time.
I know, it's terrible isn't it. I've got bean plants that need planting out, peas following close behind, the pumpkin plants are doing really well (surprised me) and I'm going to have a glut of salad leaves...
If only I had as much time free as makeourfuture seems to have....

makeourfuture - I think your "them" and "us" rhetoric is missing the point really. We've lived in K&C for 16 years. DH is an entrepreneur, self-made after a stint in banking and probably everything you despise. Yet we did not vote Tory and nor did most of our street because many of us hail from EU countries and couldn't get behind TM's hard Brexit campaign. Nor could we vote Corbyn because people just don't believe or have confidence in his policies. I'm sure he means well, but don't we all? Conversely, we have relatives in Wales who have lived in social housing and claimed benefits for their entire lives and they voted Tory. Where is the logic in that?

yeah OK we are are Corbyn supporters

Nope . Socialist. Yes

Also an understanding of relative poverty may help you patronize from a standing of knowledge rather than rhetoric

Oh no what about if they have flat screen tv's too? I didn't have that in the 1970s.

Mind you there was free education and I don't remember my school having to shut because it couldn't afford to pay the teachers either. As many ate doing now. It's ok tho the richer areas are doing fundraisers

Yes, I think makeourfuture has fallen through some kind of wrinkle in time and still believes we're in the 70s, thereby missing all the nuances/inconsistencies of today's voting patterns.

Lady cite something other than one poll. As I have said has always been thus.

How about looking at the intergenerational differences. That's the one the Tories need to worry about

There's been a lot of the "wait until the oldies die off" stuff. Not very nice.

But... young people grow up and have to pay taxes and then they become a bit more cautious. Also ds (18) and all his friends voted Conservative. Comprehensive boys too. Not every young person in the country was at Glastonbury. Quite a lot are not rich enough! Actually ds said the first law he'd pass as PM would be no sitting on shoulders.

There's quite a few young conservatives about now gotto.

They tend to be working class, blue collar types though - far removed from the middle class's offspring who enjoy paying lip service to socialism & think it's Fun! to display their I care credentials as vocally as possible.

There have always been a lot of blue collar, working class conservative voters.

If only the wealthy or middle class voted Tory, they'd never get in.

Mn comes across as quite partisan but of course in real life there are millions of people who happily change their votes each election.

The Tories do need to worry about their base though. Heseltine writes how they are losing 2% of their core support every year.

This is quite funny...

order-order.com/2017/06/27/lefties-duped-by-why-socialism-works-guide-on-amazon/

"...Spare a thought for any socialists searching on Amazon for their summer reading. On the face of it, 'Why Socialism Works' by Harrison Lievesley seems a sensible purchase for wannabe Jez fans. Most reviews are very positive, indeed the vast majority give five-star ratings. One calls it “a proper left wing economic primer”, another says “Absolutely gripping, I couldn’t put it down”.
Enough to convince budding lefties to order the £7.99 paperback. Cue disappointment when, upon taking delivery of ‘Why Socialism Works’, readers found every one of its 169 pages reads: “It doesn’t”..."

Thanks, Faith. Made me chuckle when chuckles are hard to find.

Well Tories take heart, my kids consider themselves conservatives and one has voted so already.

I still have not managed to cross the rubicon.. old habits.

I'm thinking one partial issue is that I'm so busy venting about McDonnell and Sturgeon that government policy gets ignored in our house.

what have tv screens and mobile phones got to do with the argument

Of course I am aware that there is poverty in this country, that too many families are in B&B sharing a space that is simply unacceptable. But I would argue about there being less help. The benefit system is better now, the top up tax credits is better now, the help towards childcare costs is better now its far far from perfect. I am also aware that many people feel there is no hope and very little support, but the UK was in a really really difficult place in the 70's what we see as poverty now like I said before wasn't registered as poverty (we were still a very rich country compared to many)

the biggest problem now is ridiculously high rents, an economy that wants high production, pay low wages (basic wage will not be much higher than benefits for some which is a ridiculous situation)

Never going to happen. Love the fact he was preaching to champagne socialists at Glasto who'd spent £300 each on a ticket.,
For the record I can't bear him or what's going on under Tory govt.

i suppose, i'm trying to dimly relate to the feeling back in 1997 when Blair came in and relate that to how the young Corbyn fans feel. New labour had better credentials, in my view, more tested and sensible policies, more substance. I just cannot get past the fact that Corbyn is not offering anything new. There are no brilliant ideas in his manifesto, no complicated solutions to complicated problems, just a big hand out of cash we don't have.

they are populist offerings

simple pleasing offerings that sound good, many would agree with but economics and politics is far more complex than that

but in the end people will believe in what they want to believe, hence why Trump came to power

just a big hand out of cash we don't have

Again you people bang this "magic money tree" drum. Labour's manifesto contained nothing out of reach. It was, in fact, the Tory Regime's Manifesto which was uncosted (and certainly had no billions for the DUP bribe). Nothing about exploding Tory Debt. Nothing about growth.

No plans. No vision.

Neither party was being honest about the true cost or affordability of their policies - labour's had more commitments and more growth and employment damaging changes though.

Labour's manifesto was properly coated. The Tories just didn't bother, although given that they've done a U-turn on most of it, it probably wasn't worth their while bothering.

Before Blair, the Labour manifesto would have been pretty much run if the mill policies of investing in people to promote economic growth, ensure that the richest pay their share rather than money continually being taken from the poor.

Enthusiastic, I doubt the hundreds of thousands of people who are repeatedly having their benefits sanctioned, people with disabilities who are no longer entitled to benefits and the working poor who are having to resort to using food banks to feed their families would agree that the benefit system is better now.

Labour's manifesto was properly coated

no it wasnt

as they are not in power they didn't really have the first clue about what things cost. It was 'properly costed' in that they made up figures that they would save which they then used to fund the made up figures of what they would spend.

Taxing the top 5% of earners would raise peanuts. It was a sop to people who believe that the rich are so rich they can fund everyone in this country if they are taxed a bit extra.

they are not in power they didn't really have the first clue about what things cost

Yes it was.

With very few exceptions bubgets are open for all to peruse. You can do it yourself.

I know a great deal about aspects of the budget and could make acurate predictions. And I am not in Whitehall.

Now the Tories, they can not seem to make their budgets work. Disaster.

they are not in power they didn't really have the first clue about what things cost

Yes it was.

With very few exceptions bubgets are open for all to peruse. You can do it yourself.

I know a great deal about aspects of the budget and could make acurate predictions. And I am not in Whitehall.

Now the Tories, they can not seem to make their budgets work. Disaster.

They tend to be working class, blue collar types though - far removed from the middle class's offspring who enjoy paying lip service to socialism & think it's Fun! to display their I care credentials as vocally as possible.

Never going to happen. Love the fact he was preaching to champagne socialists at Glasto who'd spent £300 each on a ticket.,

How bloody patronising, comments like that are exactly the reason some young people choose socialism.

As for champagne socialists, so what? I had champagne last night, I am a socialist. I'm on benefits too, now get your knickers in a twist. Alternatively, grow up. There is nothing wrong with being able to afford champagne and being a socialist, wanting a redistribution of wealth is not a fucking class crime.

Baalam, there is quite a bit of evidence to demonstrate that Labour are better at budgeting than the Tories. Oh, and of course they had a clue what things cost. For heaven's sake, they have access to the civil service too, you know.