The monthly ComRes online poll for the Indy on Sunday and Sunday Mirror is out today and has topline figures of CON 40%(-2), LAB 29%(+2), LDEM 7%(nc), UKIP 16%(+1), GRN 3%(nc). The changes since last month are likely just a reversion to the mean – the previous poll was the one giving the Conservatives a fifteen point lead that got lots of people rather overexcited. Full tabs are here.

If that was last month’s Twitter overexcitement, this month everyone is getting too excited about the Scottish crossbreak in the ComRes poll which has the Conservative party ahead of Labour. Don’t read anything into this: regional crossbreaks in voting intention polls are best ignored. With a sample size of 156 people the margin of error of each figure is about 8 points. On top of that GB polls are generally sampled and weighted to GB targets, so the figures within crossbreaks may be a bit off.

There aren’t many recent polls of Westminster voting intention in Scotland – at the current stage in the electoral cycle most Scottish polls are asking exclusively about the Holyrood elections. Looking at those figures there are some showing Labour and the Conservatives quite close in support (the latest MORI and YouGov polls had them within two points of each other), there are other companies (like TNS) showing a bigger gap. There haven’t been any proper Scottish polls showing the Conservatives ahead of Labour in Holyrood intentions.

Of course, it’s possible that the Conservatives are doing better than Labour in Westminster voting intentions in Scotland – we haven’t had a recent poll – but I expect this one is just a case of random noise from small sample sizes. Looking at other recent GB polls YouGov had Labour ahead of the Conservatives in Scotland, so did ICM. MORI had the Conservatives ahead. I expect the true position is that they have quite similar support, meaning that in small crossbreaks random chance will spit out some with more Tories than Labour, some with more Labour than Tories.


95 Responses to “ComRes/Indy on Sunday – CON 40, LAB 29, LD 7, UKIP 16, GRN 3”

1 2
  1. When unweighted responses are Con 30%, Lab 33%, but published results show Con 40%, Lab 29%, surely there must be some questions raised over methodology. Whether that be the sample or the weighting I don’t know.

  2. Things to remember when doubting polls:

    1) The polls weren’t THAT far wrong.
    2) They ALL underestimated rather than overstated the Tory VI.

    We learned the dangers of doubting weighting at the General Election.

  3. Hello, after a lovely run on our beach in Bournemouth East.

    I think that Labour are about 17% below where Labour was under Ed Miliband in the equivalent stage in 2010.

  4. ANTHONY WELLS
    Of course, it’s possible that the Conservatives are doing better than Labour in Westminster voting intentions in Scotland – we haven’t had a recent poll – but I expect this one is just a case of random noise from small sample sizes.

    MRNAMELESS
    They ALL underestimated rather than overstated the Tory VI.

    YouGov’s May day 2015 poll got the Con vote in Scotland almost exactly right at 15% vs the actual result of 14.9%.

    Accordingly, the post 2015 GE weightings which presumably are now weighted better to account for shy or last moment Cons is near certain to overstate the Cons in the Scottish cross-break.

    Perhaps there is also some drift by hardcore unionists from Lab to Con but absent a Scottish poll on Westminster VI that is not proven.

  5. Barbazenzero

    “Perhaps there is also some drift by hardcore unionists from Lab to Con but absent a Scottish poll on Westminster VI that is not proven.

    Agreed, though it may be that confirmed Unionists may have less reason to switch votes between Holyrood and Westminster than the traditional SNP/Lab switchers that were so obvious in 2010 and previously.

    Much interesting speculation as to what might happen, but virtually no evidence as yet.

  6. PHILIP VABULAS

    Not sure where you are getting that from, page 7 (Table 3/1) gives the responses (not weighted for turnout) as Con 32%, Lab 29%

  7. Chrislane

    In December 2010 the two main parties were neck and neck in the polls – in the range of 37 to 41%
    At the same point in the 1987 Parliament – January 1988 – Mori recorded figures of Con 50 Lab 36..

  8. Good afternoon all from a mild Westminster North.

    Had a lovely week in Norway with a few mates. Bloody expensive.

    Okay so we have an opinion showing CON 40%(-2), LAB 29%(+2), LDEM 7%(nc), UKIP 16%(+1), GRN 3%

    and it looks bad of the ole Corby party….

    But looking at table 3/3 of the new format pdf download (likely to vote) it shows a rather closer picture. .

    Tory 32% Lab..29%.. …
    ……………
    “f that was last month’s Twitter over excitement, this month everyone is getting too excited about the Scottish crossbreak in the ComRes poll which has the Conservative party ahead of Labour. Don’t read anything into this: regional crossbreaks in voting intention polls are best ignored”
    _______

    We’ve been told this before yet the cross breaks (for Scotland) did pick up the SNP surge in Scotland after the indy ref so it’s quite plausible the Tories are ahead of Labour in Scotland.

    I mind all the times peeps were rubbishing the Scottish cross-breaks yet in May 2015 it almost ended up being “There are almost the same amount of Pandas in Scotland as Unionist MP’s”

    It’s worth pointing that out. :-)

  9. When comparing polls in 2010 with new polls changes in polling methodology need to be accounted for to get a true comparison. But not sure what this percentage ‘bump’ under the new methodology works out for each polling organisation

  10. Twitter overexcitement[:] this month everyone is getting too excited about the Scottish crossbreak in the ComRes poll which has the Conservative party ahead of Labour. […]On top of that GB polls are generally sampled and weighted to GB targets, so the figures within crossbreaks may be a bit off.

    This has been happening with regular hysteria for about two years now. Most of us have realised that patiently explaining why extrapolating a tiny, unbalanced sample is not an infallible guide to future electoral results is a lost cause. Even though the general election was SNP 50%, Lab 24%, Con 15%, LD 7.5% after numerous other polling crossbreaks predicting third place for Labour, the usual suspects go through the usual motions every time a poll throws up a random result, just as they did pre-May.

    To illustrate Anthony’s second point, the 170 Scotland sample for this poll included only 13% who voted Labour in May as opposed to Con 14%, SNP 48%, LD 14%, Other 5%, DNV/Ref 8%. The various measures ComRes are using to adjust their polls would presumably boost the Conservatives even more.

    In addition, there does seem to be a problem with online polling in Scotland due to panellists being too Tory and too English. If adjusted for, this shouldn’t effect the GB headline figures or Scotland-only polls, but crossbreaks will be skewed.

    Unfortunately Tory triumphalism and SNP shadenfreude take little notice of any of these facts

  11. @Mr Nameless

    I read your post on the previous thread about Lyam Byrne and I think I know the rain-swept Wetherspoons pub you referred to in Byrne’s Hodge Hill constituency! I know the area quite well and the seat, although the boundaries have changed a bit, is essentially the old Stetchford seat that Roy Jenkins held for Labour in the 60s and 70s. Later, it was held by Terry Davis who once famously won the safe Tory Bromsgrove and Redditch seat in a by-election in 1971. An early political awakening for a young 16 year old like me at the time! Terry lost it the recently deceased Hal Miller in the February 1974 election but had the rather unwelcome honour of being the highest polling losing candidate in the entire election. He got 29,000 votes and lost!

    Hodge Hill is pretty solidly Labour, although you’re quite right to point out that Byrne increased his majority and vote share in May, at a time when the roof was falling in for his party nationwide. He has a large personal vote and is a well respected constituency MP. Notwithstanding his faux pas in 2010, cynically and deliberately misconstrued by his political enemies, I think he’s one to watch if the Corbyn experiment runs aground and Labour looks to its social democratic wing once again. He’s a talented and rather underrated politician in my view. A scrapper and street wise one too.

  12. FPT

    Rivers10 – “99% of those claims are totally unsubstantiated and most of what remains is taken out of context i.e
    Interviewer: Can you name a dictator?
    Corbyn: Enver Hoxha
    Interviewer: What’s your opinion on cupcakes?
    Corbyn: I like them
    Next days mail front page: SHOCK INTERVIEW REVEALS CORBYN “LIKES” HISTORICAL TYRANTS!!!””

    Actually Corbyn referenced Hoxha in a speech at the Labour party Christmas do. No journalists involved at all.

    The fact that you rushed to blame journalists for putting words in his mouth rather proves my point that the Corbynistas like the Trumpers, gloss over their heroes problems or attribute them all to “the media” or “people who are afraid of him”.

    Corbyn and McDonnell are referencing Hoxha and Mao, unprompted, because these people are their frame of reference, just as Burke is a reference for Conservatives and Gaitskill is a reference for New Labourites. But you can’t see it, because like the Trumpers you are enthralled with your man and don’t want anything to spoil the dream…

  13. The most amusing political story I read this weekend wasn’t about the Labour Party Christmas Party, but that Stop the War dinner.

    JC was guest of honour , and made a speech praising the significance & power of street protest………….he entered the Restaurant by the back door in order to avoid anti-Assad Syrians protesting about STW’s policy on Syria

    :-)

  14. French Regional elections – turnout reported at 7PM 59%, apparently a historical high for regional elections.

    Good for Socialists & Republicans and bad for NF, I presume.

  15. Two comments about how the raw, unweighted data shows the two parties closer.

    One hundred years of polling methodology undone in a futile attempt to paint a picture of this not being so bad for Corbyn after all.

  16. @Cross bat and Mr Nameless.

    Re- David Laws’ response to Byrne’s faux pas.
    At least Laws got his comeuppance. Never liked him.

  17. French electoral system working the way it normally works when FN get through to a second round. For this reason Marine Le Pen, despite the media hype, has virtually no chance of winning the presidency.

  18. Good Evening All
    CANDY, Thank you for your brilliantly written post at 4.40 pm.

    CROSSBAT 11. I remember as a 16 year old seeing the poll news about Bromsgrove, on my way to school in SE London, and bein excited. I wonder whether Labour has many street fighters now.

    GRAHAM. Thanks for your figures; so Jeremy seems be quite a long way behind where Ed was and quite close to where Neil was at this stage.

  19. FN doing badly it seems. Am sat in France by coincidence watching the news and trying to draw conclusions from the shrugs and hand signals as my 100 word vocab isn’t cutting it.

  20. It seems that the French resorted to one of their great pieces of heritage: reason. Watching the French TV – I like the facial expressions and the bewilderment of the far right (cough) participants. Still they got around 40% in some (Party Card No 1 and her niece) regions.

    By the way, it seems that 2015 was a bad year for pollsters (with the exception of Scotland) – as they called this one wrong too …

  21. @ChrisLane1945

    “I remember as a 16 year old seeing the poll news about Bromsgrove, on my way to school in SE London, and bein excited. I wonder whether Labour has many street fighters now.”

    Difficult times to be a Labour sympathiser and a Villa fan at the moment, but I’m a great believer in the darkest hour always coming immediately before the dawn!

    I don’t know what became of Terry Davis after he vacated Hodge Hill, but I do remember the 1971 Bromsgrove by-election very well. Redditch quite often had a Labour run council, but Bromsgrove never did and the overall constituency, including a lot of outlying rural areas, was solidly Tory and had never returned a Labour MP before. However, when the sitting MP, James Dance, died in 1971, the by election took place when Heath’s Government was deeply unpopular and Terry Davis sensationally won it for Labour. As a young lad, harbouring left wing political views even then, I remember going to the count and seeing the wild celebrations of the Labour supporters both inside and outside the building where the count had taken place. I remember thinking; this is the party for me!

    The Tories regained the seat in 1974 and held it for another 23 years, during which time it mutated into Mid-Worcestershire and was represented by a certain Mr Eric Forth. Eventually the grand old town of Redditch grew big enough to warrant a seat of its own and duly elected Jacqui Smith in the Blair landslide of 1997. Sadly, after 13 years of having a Labour MP, the Tories captured it in 2010 and held it in 2015.

    Still got our Labour council in Redditch, though!

    :-)

  22. The thing that makes French elections really interesting and also difficult to call, is the political awareness of the electorate. They are very capable of firing a collective shot across the bows of the political establishment when the situation warrants it.

    This is, of course, much easier to do with the French system. In our, single vote, first past the post system, people don’t dare risk it and often abstain instead, which does not send the same message at all.

  23. RMJ1

    I’m not sure that you have the two factors the right way round.

    I doubt that the French are more politically aware than the English [1]. It’s just that their system allows them to fire a warning shot, while yours [1] doesn’t.

    [1] I say England intentionally as, uniquely in the UK, it lacks any sophisticated mechanism like two round elections or AMS to allow flexibility to its voters in expressing their views to political parties. I remember how bad that was for us last century as well.

  24. Candy
    Care to share what he said?

  25. Rivers10

    I presume that Candy is referring to a story first printed in the New Statesman.

    This is the Huffington Post version

    Hoxha’s new year’s message in 1967 warned citizens: “This year will be harder than last year. On the other hand, it will be easier than next year.”

    Corbyn reportedly told staff at the party event on Tuesday: “this year will be tougher than last year”.

    Hardly an endorsement of Hoxha’s extreme totalitarian nationalism.

  26. Although I am an SNP activist, I don’t accept the implication that what I’m about to say amounts to “schadenfreude”. Indeed, I’m really not sure it’s good news for us if it’s true. But here goes anyway.

    There’s been a bit of talk lately here about the Tories finishing second in Holyrood. From a narrative point of view, there’s something going for it: Davidson seems to be more effective than Dugdale (1), Labour morale is low (2) due to the inward looking nature of the recent Labour narrative (3), the media is largely hostile to UK Labour’s new leader (4), and there is a core of anti-SNP voters for whom the idea of switching Labour->Tory is less dramatic than it might seem to our southerly neighbours (5).

    Caveats: (1) is personal opinion but I believe it to be relatively commonplace amonst people who aren’t invested in Labour/Tory. (2) is from anecdotal evidence, but believable on the basis of (3) which is pretty obvious given the open factionalism and like of Danczuk briefing against Corbyn any chance he gets. (4) might well depend on ones political outlook, but should hopefully be assented to by most people irrespective of whether they think Corbyn deserves it, and (5) stems from my belief that people who are immovably unionist, perhaps a third of Scotland, will still tend to see independence as one of the key issues of Scottish politics, and will have a temptation to switch parties tactically. These are the people who are strong candidates for swinging in behind the Tories if they sense, as I do, that the Tories are the stronger challenger to the SNP.

    On top of all the above sources of possible error, there’s the chance of confirmation bias: since I’m already of the opinion that the Tories are doing well, this poll encourages me.

    Now, I hope I’ve put enough caveats, so I’ll finish off with a bold statement for which I have no evidence. Sometimes, the sentiment you pick up “on the doorstep” goes ahead of polls. I think the very act of forcing people to choose one party in an opinion poll creates a “snap-back” effect, where they will revert to a safe or tried and tested conclusion that might mask the fact they are swithering between two parties. I think there might be SOME sitations where a gradual move isn’t picked up because people don’t feel emboldened to say they are shifting. So in Scotland right now, I think there might be some previous Labour voters who are 55% Tory 45% Labour now, and do not want to say “Tory” on a polling return because they simply aren’t ready to come out and say it. But should they see Tories feeling confident, cavassers with energy because their morale is high, and, most importantly perhaps, other people admitting to the fact they are maybe perhaps half considering possibly voting Tory, it might help them to come out of the woodwork and say so.
    I think we are just at the start of that “coming out”. I think the Tories are going to finish second in Holyrood, and the polling will start to reflect it slowly but surely.

    After all that rambling, I refer you back to my opening remark. From my personal political point of view, this isn’t good news. From my party’s point of view, it might be good news. And of course, basically all of what I’ve said is anecdotal and unmeasured. I could be completely wrong. But one thing I’m definitely right about is that not all such predictions from SNP people like me are schadenfreude or wishful thinking.

  27. Oldmat
    If true I expected it would be something along those lines ie a feeble attempt at linking the two. I don’t see how the irony is lost on some people that while they’re claiming I’m a swivel eyed loon for whom Corbyn can do no wrong they present themselves as swivel eyed loons for whom Corbyn can do no right. Just judge a politician on their merits.

  28. Rivers10

    It’s often interesting to drill down from the confident statements of partisan folk, to the actuality of their source.

    Sadly, I see similar kinds of nonsense from partisans from all political strands (including my own).

    However, it only becomes a problem when the partisans in the MSM betray their journalistic training and repeat the nonsense and, even worse, the broadcast media repeat it to a wider audience.

    Not all political stances suffer equally from such misrepresentation.

  29. @ Rivers10

    Anything can be linked – or worse, as good old Richelieu said.

    As to the particular quote, (I quite freely quote from the Bible, and nobody has accused me with any kind of Christianity, but from the view of the press, it is besides the point – so it puts into a perspective. Quoting a Middle Eastern bearded immigrant is OK apparently) – anyway after the long paranthesis: Hoxa (a nationalist competing with another nationalist, Tito) said this when Khrushchev first told him that there was no problem with Soviet aid as the “rats eat more grain than the Albanians”, then “no support for you and we don’t mind losing Durazzo as we have intercontinental missiles. Yes, Khrushchev never lost his Trot roots…

    JC is a social democrat, and he carries both the benefits and the curse of I.

  30. Apologies for the spelling. The usual IPad conspiracy.

  31. Laszlo
    I too appear to be suffering from Apples agenda, my iPad led me to adress my last post to Old “MAT” I don’t know how oldnat has decorated his home but i do not wish to insult any mats he has adorned his floors with.

  32. Alun009

    As I suggested upthread “Much interesting speculation as to what might happen, but virtually no evidence as yet.”

    However, there is certainly a lot of evidence that people are prepared to “come out” if there is a support network – in this case, other people who express that shared opinion.

    A good example might be the “toxic party” meme.

    Labour (and subsequently SNP) successfully peddled the meme that the “Tories were toxic in Scotland”. That meme was promulgated in the media and became received wisdom – yet 20%(?) of Scots still voted Tory, and many more voted for candidates from LD and LiS who were somewhat similar to Tories (but had an acceptable, not a toxic label).

    But times have changed.

    ComRes ask a useful question about whether people think of themselves as being Party X. The Scottish sample (all respondents) has been relatively stable for months, and it is interesting to compare that with the VI of those likely to vote (CR don’t include that data for all respondents, so a direct comparison can’t be made).

    Still, the figures raise intriguing questions as to the differences (given that the two figures are almost identical in England). It doesn’t actually matter if the sample is properly representative of Scots or not.

    Party : “think of” : W/M VI

    SNP : 42% : 46%
    Con : 20% : 18%
    Lab : 17% : 13%
    LD : 8% : 9%
    UKIP : 2% : 6%
    Grn : 1% : 2%
    ??? : 12% : 6%

  33. Rivers10

    Naturally, in my castle, I have lots of old mats – but I call them tapestries, and they adorn the walls, not the floors (which are, of course, strewn with rushes to absorb the food remnants and give the serfs a comfortable place to sleep). :-)

  34. I seem to remember before the last General Election some of the cross breaks showed the Conservatives second and there was a little over enthusiasm on here then that Labour would be pushed into third place. Come the election in Scotland, SNP got 50%, Labour 24.3% and Conservatives 14.9%.

    I suspect it hasn’t changed much, do not believe Corbyn will be a turn off for voters in Scotland

  35. Meant to say in relation to the above that the slight over enthusiasm is from only a very few and that AW has made a very fair assessment of the situation.

  36. @NEIL J
    It could of course be that the Scots of Tory persuasion, could not resist the temptation to give Labour a really good kicking by voting SNP. If true, that may now unwind.

  37. @RMJ1

    “It could of course be that the Scots of Tory persuasion, could not resist the temptation to give Labour a really good kicking by voting SNP. If true, that may now unwind.”

    There may be some truth in this given that the Tory VI of 14.9% in May was the party’s worst ever performance in Scotland in a UK wide general election. The previous nadir was in 2001 when they got 15.6% of the vote. They even scraped 17.5% in the Blair landslide of 1997!

    How much of the “anyone but Labour” Tory vote there is to unwind from the SNP vote is a moot point though, considering that the Tory vote has been bumping around in the upper teens in Scotland for nigh on a quarter of a century now. I doubt if there’s much to come back and it could well be that the odd Scottish cross-break Tory lead over Labour is a product of a survey that’s overrating the Tory strength nationally anyway. Most pollsters are showing smaller Tory VIs and leads than ComRes, so it wouldn’t surprise me at all that a national poll showing a 11% Tory lead is over-egging it in Scotland too.

    We need a Scottish only poll to see what’s really going on, but I’d be a little sceptical of any talk of a Scottish Tory revival, certainly considering how they fared only 7 months ago in May in an election they actually won nationwide.

  38. PHILIP VABULAS

    When unweighted responses are Con 30%, Lab 33%, but published results show Con 40%, Lab 29%

    Actually they’re not. The unadjusted figures (after removing DKs etc) are:

    Con 36% (40)

    Lab 33% (29)

    Lib Dem 6% (7)

    UKIP 17% (16)

    Green 3% (3)

    SNP 5% (4)

    With the ‘headline’ figures in brackets. So the differences aren’t as great as stated.

    However ComRes’s adjustments are based not just on likelihood to vote (with varying weights) but other questions as well designed to draw more information from less decided voters plus other reapportionments. So they are using extra information which may (or may not) get their figures closer to what the current political will of GB actually is.

    I have some suspicions that they are retrofitting their polls so they would have produced the ‘right’ result in May, which is dangerous in its assumptions[1]. I also wonder if they should be producing separate correction mechanisms for their online and phone polls as these may be meeting different problems. But what they are trying to do is perfectly valid and would be expected to produce such results. It is also based on a system that ComRes have been using for many years, so most of the changes from the figures above will have been due to factors they long catered for. And no one is saying that the pollsters got May wrong because they didn’t have the Labour rating high enough.

    [1] This is partly because it assumes that the next GE will be affected by exactly the same factors as the last. Mainly, however, if you don’t analyse the factors that caused the polling failure and just impose a formula that produces the ‘right’ result for a particular set of data, you may be making adjustments that irrelevant or even go the wrong way.

  39. RMJ1

    “If true”.

    It could of course be that lizards infiltrated the Scottish Lib-Dems, whose former voters could not resist the temptation to give SLDs a really good kicking by voting for anyone else.

    If true, there may be serious victimisation of lizards in the future.

  40. OldNat – “Hoxha’s new year’s message in 1967 warned citizens: “This year will be harder than last year. On the other hand, it will be easier than next year.”
    Corbyn reportedly told staff at the party event on Tuesday: “this year will be tougher than last year”.
    Hardly an endorsement of Hoxha’s extreme totalitarian nationalism.”

    Actually he said, “As Hoxha said, this year will be tougher than next year”.

    He name-checked Hoxha to signal that was who was his guiding light.

    If he hadn’t name checked him, as the Corbynistas are trying to pretend, there would be no problem.

    Who on earth name-checks dictators as examples they are going to follow, unless they are trying to signal their frame of reference?

  41. P.S. Your average member of the British press wouldn’t have recognised the quote was from Hoxha without Corbyn telling them it was.

    Unlike Corbyn, it’s safe to say none of them have pored over the dictators speeches. So blaming the press for a name Corbyn freely brought up, is again, Corbynistas behaving like Trumpers and trying to gloss over what their Dear Leader is saying.

  42. @Candy

    That can’t be right. I’ve heard countless UK politicians of various stripes refer to the journey of a thousand miles beginning with a single step. Does that mean they all endorse Mao?

  43. @Raf

    If they name check him, yes, if they don’t name check him, no.

    Speeches are different from interviews, there is nothing off-the-cuff and all the words are weighed. There is only one reason to name-check Hoxha and that is to signal that Corbyn had read all his speeches. He wanted people to know who he was quoting. He probably realised your average Brit (and Labour party member) would miss the context without the name.

    If you were giving a speech at a Christmas do would it cross your mind to mention communist dictators by name? If no, then congratulations, you are to the right of Corbyn!

  44. I believe the “thousand flowers bloom” quote from Mao was used by the coalition government.

    Corbyn’s opponents would be better off sticking to his genuine mistakes rather than throwing around chaff.

  45. http://w ww.theguardian.com/business/2015/dec/14/spain-energy-giant-abengoa-collapse-predicted-by-17-year-old

    A rather lovely story telling us that despite everything, the ratings agencies and international accountancy firms still know nothing, and couldn’t recognise a failing business if it bit them on the backside. With this lack of recognition within the finance sector of the real causes of what went wrong, I have no doubt we’ll be there again before ere long.

    Meanwhile, there is validation today from the National Grid regarding the greater use of renewables within the national supply. The advent of smart meters and mobile technology has long been held by the renewables sector to hold the key to developing a new model of energy, where prices to the consumer, not just the wholesalers, can vary according to supply.

    Trials of variable rate electricity to accord with periods of high renewable availability, with domestic customers being informed by text of the following days tariff times, have enabled consumers to switch the timing of variable demand activities, reducing demand in low output periods to help balance the grid, while also targeting cheaper periods to save themselves money.

    This is the future, and not a thorium atom in site.

  46. @ Hawthorn,

    That is true but it is unlikely that anybody would ever accuse Messrs Cameron, Clegg or Osbourne of being closet Marxists.

    If you are coming under fire for being a “Loony Lefty” it is perhaps unwise to publicly quote Mao or Hoxha. Assuming that your politics has moved beyond the student union bar.

  47. Sorry, that should read “publicly to quote”.

  48. Candy

    I hope you enjoyed the meal at the Labour Xmas dinner, to hear the actual quote.

    I just Googled Hoxha and Corbyn when Rivers10 wondered what you were on about, and came up with the Huff Post. I could have looked at a multitude of papers like the Wiltshire Advertiser.

    They all carried the same PA story that the New Statesman was making this claim.

    Still, it seems likely that Corbyn would have quoted his source. It’s good practice, that I recommend you follow.

    Of course, some folk are going to get excited, when it is patiently explained to them who Hoxha was.

    The need by some to make assertions that Corbyn “name-checked dictators as examples they are going to follow” or that “there is only one reason to name-check Hoxha and that is to signal that Corbyn had read all his speeches” is an odd thing to do– well worthy of study in itself.

    Most of us who post here are likely to be able to quote from the sayings of politicians that we disagree with, without having “pored over” them.

    To be unable to do so is surely the mark of poor education

  49. Took me 4 attempts to post that, as I had forgotten that the word “pecul1ar” contains a synonym for “Carmichael”. :-)

  50. Huge breaking story with epic potential political repercussions –

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/kate-middleton/12048292/Kate-Middleton-buys-wipe-clean-table-cloth-as-she-prepares-to-host-Christmas-with-her-young-family.html

    Something must be done about these gangs of underemployed journalists, hanging around on street corners being anti social and causing trouble. You almost feel sorry for them.

1 2