to wonder why Corbyn isn't more popular considering the battering Theresa May/the Tories is getting?

[mothertruck3r]

The Tories/Theresa May have been getting an absolute kicking in the press recently (rightly deserved) and every day there seems to be a new controversy. May seems completely inefficient and doesn't seem to know whether she is coming or going (literally).

However, I am surprised that Corbyn/Labour is not polling higher. On all the polls I have looked at his rating seems to be either equal to, very slightly above or very slightly below May. He should be well out in front at this point.

I am not a Corbyn/Labour fan (although agree with a lot of their policies) but I am wondering why is he not polling better?

Call it lunacy if you like, that is fine with me.

But consider the sanity of the vast, vast (bottomless really) levels of support the taxpayer gave (and continues to give) to the finance industry - for them to reply to the very real needs of those same taxpayers (food, medical care) with continued support of offshore schemes, scandalous practice and non-transparency.

Have you read the Communist Manifesto Rebeccaslicker? I get the impression not.

This type of politically correct insanity is not doing Labour any favours.

19 lad trans'woman' helped to lead a bullying and harassment campaign against a veteran Women's Officer in the constituency of Rochester and Strood has now been elected as the new Woman's Officer for the constituency.

www.thetimes.co.uk/article/trans-teenager-lily-madigan-voted-in-as-a-labour-women-s-officer-mwchkhzq8?shareToken=472df23aa6315582a4f6558d7a1be5ba

This is the constituency where the executive committee resigned in support of Anne Ruzylo, who had been the subject of bullying and harassment over trans issues.

So, as well as being instrumental in behaviour which would get most party members suspended or expelled, this entitled little twat has benefited from it, going against every tenet of the spirit of the Labour Party.

This story alone is going to put people off. By people, I mean women.

19 year old lad trans'woman'.

Nope. I'm too busy working long hours and paying six figures in tax a year to read that sort of feckless shite, peregrina!

Shots I know they got more votes than labour. It’s a majority, not an ‘overall majority’ which means either 50%+ of the vote or of he electorate depending on how strict you are being. It means more people want you in government than don’t. May’s Conservatives were a long way from that. Almost 60% of those that voted would prefer someone else - they just don’t all agree on who. If she had an overall majority she’d likely (but not necessarily) have a majority of seats. Which she doesn’t. It’s best to get your terminology right if you want to argue coherently.

(Insert Homer Simpson gif "in case you can't tell, I'm being sarcasticl)

Make makes these threads unreadable I thought spamming wasn't allowed?

Just 42 out of 70 is a majority No, that’s not what it means. It’s not saying 42% of the whole electorate, but 42% of those who voted. So if there were 100 voters, 70 of them voted and 42% of those 70, ie 29.4 people voted Tory. Not a majority. I don’t need to make any assumptions about non-voters as the don’t count.
It’s worrying how little people understand election stats.

Nope. I'm too busy working long hours and paying six figures in tax a year to read that sort of feckless shite, peregrina!

It's a slim volume, so it shouldn't take too much time out of your oh so busy schedule. It does confirm my suspicion that you accuse others of Communism when you haven't got the foggiest of what the Communist Manifesto says, so you don't really know what you are accusing people of. makeourfuture's comment about society where the great gaps in society don't exist is a long, long way from Communism - it's what most of us would regard as Social Democracy as practised in e.g. Scandinavia.

And incidentally, since we were talking about the practicalities, this picture might help. Taken from this page which 8 know is left wing but which does have its facts right. Check if you want to.

I am not a Corbyn supporter. But he did far better at the last election than the polls suggested. He has also used social media to recruit voters, just as Trump did. Polls do not seem to be very accurate with these type of politicians. So I would suggest that we do not pay too much attention to the polls.

it's what most of us would regard as Social Democracy as practised in e.g. Scandinavia.

That would be wonderful. It's ashame that most people don't trust JC to deliver that isn't it?

I knew the sarcasm would fly right over your tiny little head! Not every word people type on here is meant literally, you know.

It’s worrying how little people understand election stats.

We do understand. You can only take into account the wishes of those who bothered voting. There was a majority of those who voted. It's impossible to reflect the wishes of those who didn't vote - you have to assume most didn't care one way or the other.

Polls do not seem to be very accurate with these type of politicians.

That's because social media users aren't a representative sample of the voting population.

Kazzy I know that. But the reality is many of these politicians do do better than the polls suggest. Both Corbyn and Trump have done better than the polls suggested.

Kazzy I know that. But the reality is many of these politicians do do better than the polls suggest. Both Corbyn and Trump have done better than the polls suggested.

Isn't the old saying that Government's lose elections, rather than the opposition winning elections?

@brasty, that sounds pretty on-point.

It was always a "least worst" election, unfortunately. We chose the least offensive (to use a broad brush term) from a piss-poor choice.

I wouldn’t trust Corbyn to tell me what time it was.

Keep up the insults Rebeccaslicker. It demonstrates the quality of your arguments. Regardless of whether people agree or disagree with Karl Marx, he was a key 19th Century thinker, so is worth reading for that alone.

Kazzy I don’t think you do understand - or else you have t read the post I was replying to and am arguing about. The poster claimed an ‘overall majority’ for May. That didn’t happen. I’m not considering the 30ish% who didn’t vote at all. The Tories got 42% of the vote. Less than half. Not an overall majority of the vote. I don’t need to guess the opinion of non-voters, they don’t count. of those who voted the Tories got less than half. More than Labour, but less than a majority.

If you can't understand posts on here properly, or even read to the bottom before rushing in to comment, I would estimate your chances of reading any actual key thinkers at less than you believe them to be. Not a great advocate for your own arguments, are you??

I don’t think any party has ever received over 50% of the vote

42% if the vote (and indeed 40%) is considered a high percentage Blair won on 43% and so did Thatcher

We never have 100% turn out for elections or anywhere near it just doesn’t happen so you can only calculate on those who voted not who can vote

So 42% is considered a high percentage similar to what Thatcher received