ComRes’s monthly poll for the Daily Mail is out, topline voting intention figures are CON 40%, LAB 28%, LDEM 7%, UKIP 10%, GRN 5%. The poll also asked about military intervention in Syria. By 56% to 33% people supported British airstrikes against ISIS in Syria and while the public are opposed to sending British group troops against ISIS, it’s less overwhelming than most of the polls I’ve seen in recent years that have broached the topic of sending British ground troops into conflicts – 49% are opposed, 41% would support. Tabs are here.

415 Responses to “ComRes/Mail – CON 40, LAB 28, LDEM 7, UKIP 10, GRN 5”

1 4 5 6 7 8 9
  1. @ RAF

    These are very good points. I’m really interested in the conclusions from them. I’m really hesitant, but as you put them out, could you share them with us. Instinctively, I think your are more correct than my views (biased by place, age, job, etc) hence the question.

  2. Laszlo – “It would be nice to have a communist takeover of the Labour party, but it won’t happen soon.”

    I don’t think the Labour party will allow it!

    I understand that Lenin slammed the Labour party in 1920 as “thoroughly imbued with bourgeois prejudices and pursues a definitely bourgeois reformist policy” and encouraged people to infiltrate it to change it.


    Apparently the big attraction was that Labour allowed it’s affiliates quote “not only to severely criticise but openly and specifically to mention the old leaders by name, and call them social-traitors. This is a very original situation: a party which unites enormous masses of workers, so that it might seem a political party, is nevertheless obliged to grant its members complete latitude.”

    Does that sound familiar?! Even now you’ve got people who joined them five minutes ago, determined to label people like long-standing Labourites like Liz Kendall and Blair as “Tories” or “Red Tories” – which is straight out of Lenin’s playbook, is it not?

    Poor old Labour – people have been taking advantage of their “latitude”and trying to hijack their brand for a century and they keep having to waste energy repelling them.

    I wonder if this stuff (attempts at entryism) will still be going on a century from now? The conservatives are lucky that people arn’t trying to hijack them.

  3. RAF

    UKIPers will not go anywhere near Corbyn as soon as somebody- most probably himself with his uncalibrated ‘principled’ “say what I think” persona- states what he believes on matters such as Islamist terrorism, economic migrants at the fence in Calais, unilateral nuclear disarmament, why we don’t need a thriving SME sector and that Business is not over regulated or over taxed.

    Anything he says on income distribution, fear of unemployment, cost of living crisis and the NHS etc wil simply be drowned out by that.

    Localism is already past its sell by date. The average household (not activists) want to elect a government that does that- not one that repeatedly throws back the onus onto them. In that sense Osborne was quicker on the draw than Cameron. He’s been busily unwinding Localism and the Bog Society since 2012. Its finished for all practical purposes..

    Of course things are not exactly the same as in the early 1980s.

    One of the main differences is that back then there was a white working class. In the subsequent 30 years this has subdivided into a lower middle class and an underclass. The aspiring LMC will be utterly turned off by Corbyns base economic message. The UC will be turned off by his cultural message especially around migration and seemingly being an apologist for Islamism. Neither will vote Labour with JC in charge.

    The three main constituencies for JC are Public sector employees; migrants and what Powell once called the migrant-descended population; along with the traditional “middle class liberal”/ “middle class lefties”. The first and last groups are not the size they once were- even if in social media they often feel that everyone is one of them. Mays election was a very strong antidote to that delusion.

    In this way the basic belief system (if not conscious formal strategy) of Labour under a Corbyn approach is not dissimilar to the Democrats across the pond- ignore the ‘angry white male’ and forge a coalition of minorities and progressives. Its more successful and farther down the road in the US. Labour can’t win with this strategy- at least not for another generation.

    Where the situation is similar to the early eighties is that the party is now once again in the hands of the activists (many of the recent ones bona fide entryists just like back then). These are people who are not representative of the average Labour member (and I include in that those who let their membership lapse over the last 5 Miliband years) let alone are they representative the typical person who voted Labour in the past.

    These far left people have decided that as the country turns yet again a further notch to the right (for example on accepting the need for austerity and further welfare reform) what Labour and the public sector Unions should do is say we need to take a gigantic leap to the left. IMHO they could not be more wrong: and its precisely the same mistake Labour made 1979- 1987. Some of them sincerely believe we need a left turn; some are hoping simply to damage Labour and scoop up the disenchanted young naive activists into their own fringe groups- again just like back in the early 1980s. It took us 4 election defeats last time to come out of our denial. If repeated there won’t be a Labour government till 2035!

    Instead of cultural and economic far leftism if we are to pick up the voters in the midlands who voted UKIP we need to talk the language of tougher immigration control and stop making nice with middle east Islamist Terror groups. If we want to pick up the southern SMEs and private sector workers we need to talk the language of business support and lower regulatory burdens along with less tax on the average family/ household.

    Only then can we get elected and ONLY then gradually begin to turn the oil tanker around and start to shift policies (and the debate) towards a more redistributive direction. This is the essential fiction/ error of JC and his apostles. For some it is a romantic delusion; for others an act of pure political vandalism. Now- just as in the 1980s- the poor and helpless will suffer far more than they would have done under a centrist Labour administration. That’s the biggest fiction of all: that a centrist social democratic Labour party is no better than a Conservative government.


    A Social Democrat party in the UK beats a right wing Conservative party. A leftist party does not (it gets the ‘traditional result’ as a wise bloke once quipped).
    You said you took the time to understand history. You clearly have overlooked this historical rule of British politics…

  4. RAF

    replied to you but in moderation

  5. Good to read a Rob Sheffield piece again. A timely reminder , in the fantasy world which has developed here since the GE, of what the sane Left of Centre sounds like .

    And so a reminder of the sort of opposition which Cons have escaped-and continue to escape as the Labour MPs face , for the second time , the prospect of a leader they didn’t t want.

    Surely if your party “activists” keep doing this , you must conclude that they are in a different party to the one you want to belong to ?

    RS’s conclusion that a split is in prospect is shared by Nellist , who says that JC will be a “prisoner” , surrounded by MPs who don’t support him and that he will need “his own party”.

    The Labour MPs seem frozen in the headlights, waiting, I suppose, for it not to happen, so they don’t have to voice serious dissent now. Just a few elder statesmen -including Kinnock of all people,-mutter concern on their high value doorsteps.

    The internal machinations of the Labour Party will grab the headlines until this deed is done. If it is Corbyn the headlines will be non-stop Labour Splits for months & months.

    Dave must wonder which of the Gods has blessed him so.

  6. Rob Sheffield

    I too will be voting for AB but Kendall would just turn Labour into PASOK. No point in winning over Tories if you lose your base. Voters are far less tribal than in the 1990s. The Blairites also need to realise that they are hopelessly out of date now in the post-crash environment. Chris Leslie’s recent intervention on Corbyn echoes what the Republicans said about Obama’s economic policy. They were wrong.

  7. Colin, if the right of the party do unite behind Jeremy C I think David C will be very worried. Mr Cameron has his own clouds on the horizon too.

    I left labour when Mr Mandelson spent sixx hundred grand on a second home, with a dodgy mortgage. Jeremy Corbin’s lifestyle and presentation is inspirational to many people previously unengaged in politics.

    A labour politician shouldn’t need or want the trappings wealth. Many are deeply cynical of MP’s parading around like Bertie Wooster nursing their thermidors, chauffeurs and shuttling from golf clubs to gentlemen’s clubs.

    In Jeremy Corbin people see someone they relate to and understand. He has one humble home, he uses buses, his expenses are amongst the lowest, no silly flash suits.

    He also has ideas not soundbytes and momentum not monotony. If the laboratory party fail to get behind him that will be a big mistake.

  8. Laboratory party? Lols.

    I was also horrified by Chris l on r4 earlier.

  9. MARKW

    I see the attractions of Ghandi like & Mother Theresa like frugality in a political leader too when so many of them wallow in the trough of expenses & freebies

    But I would want to know whether they were universally applied in their lives. I would be wary too if these features seemed part of a streak of zealotry-like putting political dogma ahead of the education of ones children.

    Equally, the population at large do not live like hermits & monks , so this stuff can be carried to excess in a politician. Something approaching “normality” would be preferred in my book.

    And when it comes to voting, loose Fiscal Policy & incontinent Monetary policy would not persuade me to vote for the most personally frugal of candidates
    .Not being free with other peoples money is a universal test of politicians -not restricted to their household budget.

  10. Chris Leslie scorns JC’s version of “QE.”

    Utterly predictable.

  11. Somehow I don’t think he’s looking to convert you Colin.

  12. Rob Sheffield

    The problem is that the Blairites ultras aren’t Social Democrats, the are a mixture of Christian Democrats and wet Tories.

    If Obama can get Keynesianism policies through in a country like the USA, then it ought to be possible for Labour to do so in the UK.

  13. Candy

    “The conservatives are lucky that people arn’t trying to hijack them.”

    That’s debatable.I just think their “entryists” have been more successful. The party of Margaret Thatcher and her supporters – The “Selsdon Group” – changed the Conservative Party out of all recognition from the days of Harold Macmillan.

  14. Lovely post from Rob Sheffield.

    The thing with major political parties is that in order to win power they have to be a ‘big tent’, as big as possible – adopt a political and policy position, and try through guile and persuasion, to persuade as many people as possible to endorse it, often very reluctantly.

    Add in personal appeal, and a feeling that you are broadly competent and won’t screw up if a major event arises.

    Then hope that the other ‘big tent’ party doesn’t do it so effectively.

    The Tories, of course, did this reasonably well, which is why they won. They had to throw some bones to the kippers, but otherwise adopted some reassuring centrist economic and social policies that secured Middle England.

    Labour cannot win unless they remain a big tent. Whoever ends up Leader will have to devise strategies and policies that keep as many on board as possible. It is no good disappearing off into an ideological wilderness.

    I have no doubt Corbyn understands this.

    His strategy is therefore to be a mild disappointment to the left, by abandoning some of their favourite policies, without alienating them, and be a pleasant surprise to the Blairites by showing unexpected common sense.

    But RAF is right: if he combines that strategy with a bottom up, ‘people’s army’ approach, and a continued personal disinterest in the trappings of office, topped up with some refreshing candour, and good humour, he could go far.

    He is, in fact, already doing this. As a bystander, I find him far more attractive and interesting than any of the other ‘plastic’ candidates chanting stuff they learnt at University.

  15. Rob Sheffield,

    Another Sheffield-based Labour supporter on this site, I make that three (if LeftyLampton ever returns).

    I too will be voting 1) Burnham 2) Cooper although don’t particularly share your enthusiasm for Kendall. I don’t so much mind her being a Blairite as much as she’s evidently not a very good campaigner (otherwise she wouldn’t be polling in last).

    My opposition to Corbyn is emotional and instinctual as much as it is political or tactical. I have always mistrusted what’s cool, an instinct that’s had mixed results over the years (tempered my enthusiasm for Obama so I wasn’t disappointed, but also made me the world’s biggest Milibandite).

    All I see is that people who really wish my party harm (Louise Mensch, Toby Young, Douglas Carswell) really want this man to win. That’s a big reason I don’t support him – even if I did agree with more of his politics, which I don’t.

    But as you say, many young people (those under 30, say) don’t know what it’s like to have perpetual Tory government. They grew up with Tony Blair as the establishment, so that’s who they rebel against. I had my political maturity over the last five years – from basically communist to passionate but rational social democrat – and it may take a while for theirs to arrive.

    Corbyn is exciting to a lot of people, I know that. It feels cruel and wrong to have to say “I know it’s fun. But it’s destructive” and take their toys away. I don’t want to let those people down, and I want those people to stay engaged with politics, for the sake of democracy if nothing else. But I also don’t want to let down the people who want or need a competent Labour opposition, followed by a competent Labour government – and there’s quite a lot more of them.

  16. On the big tend – its quite odd to see so many of the Blairite (or Blairite sympathisers) miss that a big tend policy is going to need the left involved as well. I think Labour needs to move to the left to find what that next thing is.

    Tony Blair offered the minimum wage and other social policies – Labour need to offer something to the left of the party. That’s what all the Labour candidates are failing on except Cobyrn.

    If the right of the party don’t think that losing the left could be as much an issue in 2020 as losing the right then their being rather naïve and taking the view the party had on Scotland for years – negligent.

  17. I think if the Blairites stop this democratic process and stage a coup they will destroy the LP just like the Orange Bookers destroyed the LibDems. People will leave the LP in droves. They may not have anywhere else to go but like me many will feel there is no point in voting at all.

  18. Colin.

    I did not paint him as a ghandi type figure, you did.

  19. Right wing people are commonly painting Jeremy’s supporters as religious zealots or born again bennites or trots. It’s sad and old.

  20. LIZH
    I second that view

  21. LIZH

    If jez wins the labour leadership .
    I will not be voting in 2020 there will be no point .
    A 150 majority for the tories will be nailed on in FPTP.

    We need a PR system so the tory party and labour can then split to their appropriate parts.

    Blair in 97 should have brought a fair voting system in, which at that time would have been seen a noble thing to do after winning a large majority.

  22. @Mr Nameless

    But as you say, many young people (those under 30, say) don’t know what it’s like to have perpetual Tory government. They grew up with Tony Blair as the establishment, so that’s who they rebel against. I had my political maturity over the last five years – from basically communist to passionate but rational social democrat – and it may take a while for theirs to arrive.

    What you describe isn’t political maturity.

    I started off middle-of-the-road Labour. My earliest political memories were the Conservatives winning in 1979. My extended family were miners, so the bitterness of that dispute has never left me. I joined Labour in1992, aged 21.

    Along came Tony Blair, and he offered the chance to beat the Tories. He was young charismatic etc. I went with it.

    I stayed with the party until about 2003, when I was tired of the fundamentals not changing, and realising we had seen a change of management. not a change of direction. I was tired of civil liberties being eroded. I left.

    I rejoined in 2010, knowing that it would take a defeat to rebuild the party.

    In 2012, it was clear the values I hold were stone dead in the party (the PLP especially), and while well meaning people said stay and fight from within, I was fed up of bashing my head against the same wall. I took a long read of all manifestos out there, and as the Greens ticked 95% of the values I hold, I joined.

    I never seen a reason to reverse by 2012 decision.

    The point is the journey I have made isn’t a plain one. It is easy to suggest people start young with ideals, and then life moulds then into a position of compromise. I don’t think that is always true.

    As I have got older, now with children, it is more important to stand up for what I believe in. I won’t let my values be eroded by accepting world values can’t be changed. If you don’t stop trying to change them, they will never change. I get more bloody-minded with age, and care less and less what others think.

    There are many people who haven’t bent to the pressures the world throws at them. I really admire Michael Meacher, for example.

    So suggesting that a person who softens their values over time is politically maturing, I politely suggest isn’t right.

  23. Of the 16 true Corbyn supporters how many are realistic shadow cabinet members. John O’Donnell is Corbyn’s campaign manger so is likely to get some place. Maybe Diane Abbot as she would love to be in the shadow cabinet. Dennis Skinner, Ronnie Campbell and Michael Meacher I cant see joining on age and interest grounds( especially Skinner).
    Kelvin Hopkins also a bit on the older side plus he is a massive Eurosceptic who might find Corbyn supporting the EU a bit hard to accept.
    Ian Lavrey and Grahame Morris are likely and would probably accept considering they were PPS before.
    The rest are 2015 intake and a bit early for the shadow cabinet.

  24. @DEZ

    That is up to you. Actually if I believed in some of the things that Blairites propose, I could hold my nose and vote Tory.

    This is the first time in a very long time that Corbyn is offering a real alternative to Tory lite for people like me.

  25. It is not a real alternative, if you never achieve power to implement policies.
    If we had PR you can vote for what you believe in.
    However if you live in a rotten borough like me , which has never changed party for 200 hundred years, voting becomes irrelevant.
    This is the same for many up and down the country of England.

    Instead of this partisan nonsense you should be fighting for all the people without a vote and a voice, with a change to a modern democracy.
    Not just red or blue buggins turn.

  26. London Mayoral voting intention (first preferences Survation / 03 – 10 Ju):

    LAB – 43%
    CON – 36%
    GRN – 7%
    UKIP – 7%
    LDEM – 5%

    On this, whoever wins the Labour nomination should have a reasonably easy time of it. Con, UKIP and LD combined don’t reach 50% (and some UKIP/LD would go Lab on 2nd prefs).

  27. @DEZ

    It may not be a real alternative for you but it is for me. Why will Corbyn as leader stop you voting in 2020 and not one of the other contenders? I don’t recall any of them saying they will bring in PR if they get elected.

  28. Extremely good analysis on ComRes website

  29. @ Rivers 10,

    You might be right on Burnham as shadow chancellor but if you’ll excuse my potential stupidity who’s Smith?

    Owen Smith. He’s the current Shadow Wales Secretary. Sort of John Smith but Welsh- gives the impression of a bland Welsh accountant whom you could trust to handle money, but still deft enough at the despatch box to stick it to the Tories. He’s leftwing and quietly ambitious; I think it would not be difficult to persuade him to make the case for Corbynomics.

  30. @ Rob Sheffield & Mr Nameless,

    The Corbyn momentum is not coming from entryism or naive students. a) There aren’t enough Hard Left entryists in the country to make a difference in the outcome, and b) the people I’ve spoken to who are backing him are longstanding members or supporters, many of them in my parents’ generation or older. Harry Leslie Smith is backing him, for God’s sake. These are people who lived through the early 80s and want to try this again anyway.

    It’s the easiest thing in the world to make a strong case for why Labour needs to win power and why it needs to be reasonably centrist in order to do so. If the moderates can’t do so persuasively, the problem is not with the Corbynites, the problem is with us.

    We have got to stop lecturing people that they’re doing politics wrong and whining that another wing of the party has mass appeal and can attract new supporters to the party- which was the entire goal of the new leadership election system! Which Tony Blair praised extensively when it was brought in!- and start trying to persuade them, or we will have Corbyn for a leader and we will deserve him.

  31. @”Corbynomics.”

    More correctly described as Murphynomics.

  32. Spearmint,

    Quite fair. I certainly know a lot of people of the kind you describe.

  33. @ Colin,

    Or “mainstream economics”, for about 75% of it. It’s the austerians who have the really radical opinions which are not backed up by the science…

  34. @ Mr. N,

    You’re right about Kendall, though. For someone who is allegedly an expert in winning elections, she sure seems to be coming fourth in this one.

    Also I think the Blairites do have to ask themselves how they ended up with Liz Kendall for a standard bearer. The answer of course is that all their better potential candidates are not standing, either because they flounced out of Parliament when they didn’t get their way (James Purnell, David Miliband), or because being Opposition Leader is difficult and unpleasant and they can’t be arsed (Chuka Umunna, Alan Johnson(.

    Jeremy Corbyn had the grit to stick around for decades as a backbencher when the party wasn’t moving in a direction he liked. Purnell didn’t last a year. What is it about Blairism that attracts such flaky people?

  35. CMJ,

    You’re right, and I think I expressed myself badly. What I meant by political maturity was that my politics at age 15 was driven purely by emotion, with no rational or intellectual basis. Where I am now is the same passion, but with the addition of an ideological framework for it, rather than poorly directed emotion.

    One could start out as a middle of the road social democrat because that’s how they natural feel and they haven’t thought about it very hard, but do their reading and research and have life experience and move far to the left or the right. That would also be political maturity.

  36. The man who has got British politics pretty much running his way is George Osborne. He has been vilified on this site many times, a hard faced patrician Tory Bstard. A totally incompetent buffoon who has no idea about anything. What interests me is this, does being so wrong about so many things, not deter you and interfere with your judgement on the present issues you are facing.

  37. @Spearmint

    I was going to add to my last post, something very similar. It is entirely possible for the Labour party to propose a centrist economic policy, and be completely different to the Tories.

    And still appeal to the left-leaning membership.

    I can’t believe the haplessness of the Kendall campaign, or the ‘more of the same’ tinkering approach of Burnham and Cooper.

  38. Spearmint

    There absolutely is entryism going on- Ive seen it in my own students and- most shamefully of all- some of my AWL and SWP departmental colleagues (PSC members all).

    I’d categorically argue that the vast majority of people signing up SINCE Corbyn was nominated are of this ilk or those always on the far left of the party but who drifted away from 1995 onwards.

    Though that ComRes blog describes the “anger” of the older members (not entryists) you describe quite well.

    It also makes the point that its up to the right of the party to explain why winning an election is so important and for that you have to compromise your ‘principles’ and put forward ‘practical policies’- but you also need to be able to sell them to members as well. The ‘anger’ stage of grief is drowning that “realpolitik” out for the moment: I suspect it will do until at least the Scottish Parliament elections next year- when a leftist Labour manifesto STILL gets trumped by the Nationalists- and slays the myth that we lost to them in May 2015 because we were outflanked on the left!

    Furthermore, we won in 1997 not because it was ‘our turn’ as some people are ludicrously peddling: the “anybody could have won that election as Labour leader” criminal rewriting of history school of ‘thought’.

    We won because (1) we had lost enough elections to become pragmatic and go after the reforming centre ground (including not demonising people because they made a lot of money- or aspired to)- we accepted however grudgingly that principles without power is the real betrayal of ‘our people’; and (2) because (like it or not) we had a young English charismatic photogenic leader.

    As I already wrote yesterday- the party clearly needs to go through this catharsis. It could take two or three years and a 25% poll ceiling before Corbyn goes- but I’m not sure we will be ready for compromise and pragmatism when he does. As the ComRes blog shows it took both Labour and Conservatives 4 defeats and 4 leaders from the ‘startpoint’ to get back in government (and begin to be able to change the world in your own image).

    We may need to split.

    Or we may inherit a country in 2025/ 2030 that is changed so entirely (whilst we shout impotent from the sidelines and from marches- making ourselves feel better) that the scene then makes Blairism look like Marxism…

  39. The much praised Rob Sheffield is very obviously thinking about a future that at some stage sees a left of centre government. His intelligence plots the high spots and pit falls toward this end. This does not make Rob a genius, he is “something ” in higher education who is a social democrat. Not a Japanese fighter pilot on his last mission, unlike the Corbyn followers.


    Wait till they start examining what it actually involves.

  41. LizH.

    Yes none of them do that is my point.
    However if it was a close election under FPTP some of the smaller parties might insist on electoral reform to PR.

    With Corbyn it would not be a close election.

    All democrats should support every vote counting and not the continuance of rotten boroughs in England.
    In this regard Corbyn is just another partisan,as he is with support for continued membership of the EU

  42. The latest betting shows Burnham’s odds shortening and has him back in as the marginal favourite can anyone tell me what has happened in the last 24 hours to explain this trend ? and is it a turning point?

  43. I believe these claims of entryism are hugely exaggerated. Put it this way I personally don’t know of anybody who has joined Labour to vote for Corbyn (and I’m a Green Party member and in a politics course in Uni so I’m in contact with two of the key suspect groups) but more importantly I haven’t even considered joining Labour to vote for Corbyn. If he is elected I might switch allegiance but I’m not going to bother to try and get him elected. Why is this important, without meaning to blow my own trumpet I’m probably amongst the top 1% for political engagement. I watch all the shows, read all the books and articles, follow all the pundits, attend all the rallies/protests, visit all the sites (like this one) etc etc. I’m also in agreement with Corbyn on practically everything and would go as far as to say he would be my ideal choice for PM (not just out of the current sorry lot but possibly in the post war period) And yet as I said the thought of joining Labour specifically to vote for Corbyn has barley crossed my mind. Thus I have to ask if I’m not bothering (a very politically engaged individual who would love to see Corbyn as PM) who on earth are these weirdo’s who are in such vast numbers?

  44. Yeah, I’m not convinced by claims of entryism. People who are genuinely enthused by the prospect of a Corbyn government signing up to vote for him isn’t entryism, that’s just… how things should be working. It’d be a bit worrying if people *didn’t* sign up to vote for an inspiring candidate.

    Now, there are probably a few mean-spirited Daily Mail readers and dregs of whatever remains of the Militant Tendency after twenty-five years of being irrelevant (and they really do mean nothing to my generation), but I don’t think they’re anywhere near enough to actually distort the result. As it is, they’re just giving they’re £3 to help the Labour Party, so… good on them?

    I’m not first-preferencing Corbyn myself because I find it simply silly to suggest he can either a) win or b) shift the terms of the debate anywhere but further to the right; but equally denouncing him on the basis of entryism does absolutely nothing to address why people actually want to vote for him, and just makes you less likely to be listened to in the future.

    The Blairites are doing an awfully good job of shooting themselves in their collective foot right now.

  45. Mark

    It might be that they are starting to understand that this election is not FPTP but AV.

  46. @TOP HAT
    “denouncing him on the basis of entryism does absolutely nothing to address why people actually want to vote for him, and just makes you less likely to be listened to in the future.”

    Totally agree. I can see happening to Blairites what happened to the LibDems. People will switch off when they open their mouths.

  47. Spearmint – “The Corbyn momentum is not coming from entryism or naive students”

    Then why are they using the language of entryists?

    The “Red Tory” thing is a new spin on the old “class traitor” attack that the Leninists used to deploy a century ago.

    Are you seriously saying that Labour members used to talk like this about their own party hierarchy all the time? The same people who voted for David Miliband (he did better amongst the Labour members than amongst the MPs in the 2010 electoral college)?

    People don’t swing violently from a David Miliband type to a Corbyn type in just five years. It’s more likely that the David Miliband supporters (and Ed Balls supporters) from five years ago are still social democrats but they’re being swamped by entryists.

  48. Looking at the idea of “people’s QE” in more detail, I think it would be a lot less risky to fund infrastructure through bonds.

  49. I wonder if the vote Cooper get Corbyn message is working if Burnham is ahead in the betting, although as we all know few bets will be placed on this election and it could be one relatively large punt changing the odds?


    George Osborne is the only current politician who enthuses me at the moment. I think his performance has significantly improved over the years and the last budget was a political gamechanger IMO.

1 4 5 6 7 8 9