YouGov released a new Scottish poll last night, their first poll on Scottish Independence since the EU referendum. Voting intention in another Independence referendum stands at YES 47%(+1), NO 53%(-1). Changes are from May and don’t suggest any significant difference from before the EU referendum (tabs here).

There were several polls before the European referendum suggesting that a Brexit vote would push a majority of Scots towards supporting independence, but people are not necessarily good judges of how they would respond to hypothetical situations.

On the weekend straight after after the EU referendum there were snap Scottish polls from Panelbase and Survation that had suggested a majority in favour of independence. That may be down to methodological differences, or may simply be down to timing – one can easily imagine that a poll taken in the immediate aftermath of the unexpected EU result would produce different results to one taken a month later when the news has sunk in (and indeed, that we might well see different results once British exit has been negotiated and its full impact is clear to the Scottish electorate)


610 Responses to “YouGov Scottish Independence poll”

1 8 9 10 11 12 13
  1. oops, soz for the redundant last line. Copy paste error. Wouldn’t happen under PR…

  2. Carfrew

    “Contrary to modern democracies ancient Athens appointed large numbers of government officers by lot. After describing the Athenian arrangements, the paper reviews the literature on the choice between election and lot focusing on representativeness of the population, distributive justice, minimization of conflicts, quality of appointees and administrative economy. It then examines why in drawing up the constitution a self-interested citizen may give up voting for government officials and appoint them by lot. It is shown that appointment by lot is preferred when the effort required to choose candidates is less than the benefit expected from their actions as government officials. It is also found that, given the choice, office motivated candidates may unanimously agree to selection by lot but not to election.”

    http://uir.ulster.ac.uk/19787/

    The bit I have put in bold seems to describe your position perfectly. :-)

  3. Think this thread is quite a good illustration of the problems with the campaign for PR – it has a high “ferret factor”, ie there’s a high chance that if you put two people who claim to support PR in a room together they’ll end up fighting over the voting system like ferrets in a sack.

    I’ll include myself in this – I personally support an end to FPTP and a more proportional (or at least more consensual, ie AV) voting g system, but I will absolutely never support a system that involves party lists or breaking the constituency link in the commons.

  4. PETER CAIRNS (SNP)

    The current PR system in Scotland works well (IMO) and is probably suited to smaller parliaments than to the likes of Westminster where some sort of STV system would work better.

    Looking at DAVID CARROD’S post you would think the easiest option would be to keep the current 650 seats and then allocate each party their percentage of seats based on the percentage of the votes..ie Party X wins 10% of the vote = 65 seats and so on but for countless obvious reasons that can’t work under the current FPTP set up unless the current 650 seats are split into larger constituency’s (say 400 FPTP) and the remaining 250 from a top up list.

    In fact I think I’ve solved the problem. :-)

  5. @BZ

    I strongly support a move to UK federalism, but I think it can only work if England is split into several regions. It was one of the Blair government’s many failings that it failed to effectively move in this direction, by offering the NE a watered down nothing-much of a regional assembly, instead of a fully-fledged regional government on a par with Scotland.

  6. ROBIN

    I also like the idea of a federal UK but why would England need to be split up into regions? The needs of the people in the Highlands of Scotland are completely different from those in Glasgow yet both areas are perfectly represented in the Scottish parliament.

    So why wouldn’t a national federal English parliament equally represent people living in Cumbria to those living on Manchester without having to split England up into federal areas?

    You could end up with different speed limits in 12 different areas across the UK which is fine in a large country like the USA but in the UK?

    I think if we’re heading for a federal UK then we just need 4 federal parliaments…Scotland, Wales NI and England.

  7. ROBIN @BZ
    I strongly support a move to UK federalism, but I think it can only work if England is split into several regions.

    Fair enough, but that seems not to be what England wants, quite possibly because of the half-hearted attempt at an NE assembly you refer to.

    How the toothpaste can be put back into the tube and a fresh start made is less obvious.

  8. ROBIN @BZ

    Sorry, only the because should have been in bold.

  9. @ToH

    “Nice idea but how do you administer it?”

    ———–

    Ah, well, see, if someone invents a cure for cancer, they get a cut in tax. If someone’s in charge when a bank melts down, they get extra tax.

    (You can usually tell who’s in charge as they will likely have wangled a big pay packet and gone on about being a master of the Universe and are prolly busy shredding documents like crazy. They may even have been knighted or summat…)

  10. @oldnat

    yes, I mean, I don’t put much effort in at all to picking candudates to vote for, and still, their value seems often less than the effort I put in. which is saying summat…

  11. @Colin – thanks for your response to my post this morning. I agree. It certainly looks like Corbyn does not think parliament is important. Sadly, his followers will learn the follow of this in due course.

    I also note that none of his supporters have tried to answer the conundrum I posed. It seems relatively easy to generate large crowds and a big buzz through social media. We also know that this has led, if anything, to falling poll ratings for Labour and Corbyn personally.

    If his supporters can persuade me that something magical has happened in the last few days that means this public support will translate into poll support, I will be happy, but they haven’t, and choose not to engage when we ask awkward questions like ‘why don’t many voters like Corbyn?’.

    The ‘establishment’ are loving this. Labour is turning itself into a complete irrelevancy and they don’t have to lift a finger.

  12. Test

    [B} Bold [/B]

    [I] Italic [/I]

    Just checking that works

  13. Allan Christie @ 2.15 pm

    The scale of the difference in attitude, knowledge and needs between Cumbria and Manchester compared to the difference between Glasgow and the Scottish Highlands is altogether greater.

    Obviously you haven`t lived in these areas and empathised with the locals, but you are wishfully thinking in the hope the right-wing Southern English can remain dominant in England.

    So it is essential for England to have regional governments, to keep a balance in priorities and spending.

    This should also be obvious from the population sizes, that would give roughly parallel units for English regions and all Scotland.

  14. Another test:

    Bold

    Italic

    Should work with the correct brackets …

  15. @ Alec

    Perhaps there was no answer from anyone as you didn’t have a question?

    You seemed to miss the point that these rallies are about the Labour leadership contest not about the country or the electorate. Any of those are completely irrelevant in the current cycle.

    These rallies are parts of an internal LP conversation, so your question had no substance. The Liverpool one had a relatively large Union presence, which is important for the affiliate vote. So all that stuff about “talking to the converted” is non sequitur too.

  16. Alec

    No one replied to you because of the hysterical tone. Some corbyn supporters seem to be a bit unbalanced but a lot of his opponents seem to have lost their minds and are figuratively frothing at the mouth. Please restrain yourself and make sensible thought out points, rather than using words like bricks

    Im trying not to respond to deliberately provocative and arguementive posts and low level insults on the basis of “don’t feed the trolls”

  17. @Alec

    It’s also worth bearing in mind that Corbyn’s opponents also don’t tend to engage with the issue that Corbyn may not do well in polls because of the media, and don’t want to pursue quasi-neolib policies just to get favourable press.

    Also, its hard to be convinced they really did collaborate with Corbyn and give him a decent shot given how early they acted against and how ruthlessly and how choreographed. And their constant bleating to the press isn’t very noble either…

    And surely it’s them dragging down the poll ratings not Corbyn. Still, if you like the parachuted careerist thing, it’s your prerogative…

  18. CAMBRIDGERACHEL
    @Alec

    ” hysterical tone” ” unbalanced” ” lost their minds” “figuratively frothing at the mouth” ” restrain yourself”
    _____

    I take it Alec is off the Christmas card list? ;-)

  19. The Corbyn thing is amazing to behold. He’s like a footie manager who’s inherited a team loyal to the previous regime and with a prediliction for scoring own goals, and yet even though he gave them a chance the manager gets the blame.

    Will we get any polling on whether peeps blame Corbyn or the PLP?,

  20. CARFREW
    @ ALEC

    A few home truths in your post and absolutely spot on. :-) :-)

  21. @Lazslo – “Perhaps there was no answer from anyone as you didn’t have a question?

    You seemed to miss the point that these rallies are about the Labour leadership contest not about the country or the electorate.”

    Sorry Lazslo, but you are completely incorrect on this. I did pose a question, which is why does Corbyn attract huge attendances at rallies but score appallingly badly in opinion polls, along with his party.

    This question is also absolutely central to the Labour leadership election, because the point of the election is to find a leader who can create the circumstances for labour to win in a general election.

    If you really think that the leadership election is occurring in a vacuum, with no relevance to the country or the wider electorate, then I can understand why you might think Labour is doing just fine.

  22. @Allan C

    Why thank you. It’s not all gravy however, because it occurs to me concerning the earlier random jury selection of our politicians thing, that it might be a bit problematic for polling on voting intention, on account of there being no voting intention to poll.

    On the plus side, at least they couldn’t get it wrong…

  23. @Cambridgerachel – I’m not one to bother getting all huffy and demanding apologies, but if you could point out which of my posts today and last night was hysterical, precisely where I frothed at the mouth, and confirm whether or not you are refering to me as a troll, it would be illuminating.

    For the record, my posts detailed a couple of points regarding counting crowds, and on the limited information I had available to me I think my estimation of the Liverpool rally was pretty good, to be frank.

    I then went on to describe this attendace as ‘huge’, and asked a very straightforward question relating to polling, along with some personal thoughts based on published information about whether or not the PLP worked to undermine Corbyn as dramatically as some claim.

    I’m sorry if that makes you think I am using words ‘like bricks’, but I have a suspicion that if so, that may be more of a reflection of your thoughts rather than my actions.

  24. @John Pilgrim

    I recall your previous posts on this subject, and acknowledge your expertise in the area of population studies.

    As I think you would agree, it is not just numbers, it is the distribution of the population across the age ranges that is equally important.

    So we have seen Japan’s resistance to immigration leaving it with an imbalanced population that is having a negative economic impact. Likewise, Merkel’s enthusiasm for inward migration no doubt reflects the uneven distribution in Germany.

    This is why I stressed that population control in this country must be introduced gradually, so as not to create distortions that will impact on the economy over long periods of time.

    My main thinking is that to encourage rapid population growth in order to stimulate economic activity is not a great long term policy. A stable population with a balanced age profile is surely a reasonable goal, allowing of course for the natural swings and changes that governments cannot avoid.

    Today’s news is dominated by reports of a housing crisis: I can’t think another 5 million residents over the next ten years is really desirable in these circumstances.

  25. “which is why does Corbyn attract huge attendances at rallies but score appallingly badly in opinion polls, along with his party.”

    ——–

    ooooh, tricky one innit. The MPs keep causing trouble and it has a negative effect on polling. How can that be???…

  26. @ Alec

    No, the leadership election doesn’t happen in a vacuum. However, it a good practice to maintain focus (whoever writes these scripts).

    I don’t know about Corbyn’s management skills, and I’m sorry, but I don’t trust the newspaper briefings. So, there could be a fair share of burden on Corbyn.

    However, there is evidence of systematic and wilful sabotage both by the PLP, and the Central Office. We also have evidence of systematic smearing in which the press and media are complicit.

    I don’t think Labour could win an election without some sort of coalition. I clearly remember how I fought with my own disbelief of the polls last May, and then successfully convinced myself.

    So, from Corbyn’s point of view, the first thing is winning the leadership. He has to do the rallies – he probably also enjoys them – as he wouldn’t be reported. Even the liberal press (Guardian and Independent) wilfully misrepresents things, and the BBC is also participant in this. It is not a JC conspiracy theory, it is the reality. Whatever is their reason, which can be honourable, it is there. Also rallies actually nicely fit Labour. You may also remember those student demos in the beginning of the decade – well those kids are now in their mid, late 20s. They do know rallies. They don’t really vote, but who knows.

    I hope that Corbyn’s followers will win the NEC elections, and once (if) Corbyn is elected, a number of MPs are are put under investigation and are not dis selected, but expelled from the party in a disciplinary action. It is none of my business, but I would like to see.

    One more, very anecdotal story. My LibDem dog walking friend told me this morning that he was very impressed by Corbyn (it was a good speech), and that he hoped that there would be some measures in place once Corbyn is reelected to get the Tories out of government.

  27. @Alec

    “along with some personal thoughts based on published information about whether or not the PLP worked to undermine Corbyn as dramatically as some claim.”

    ——

    It’s not a claim. They really did move against him, early, and choreographed.

    You’re just.ignoring that and bigging up their claims, their running to the press in an attempt to excuse it. There won’t be any shortage of such stuff if it floats your boat, but I think we got the idea now Alec!!!

  28. ALEC

    “Sorry Lazslo, but you are completely incorrect on this. I did pose a question, which is why does Corbyn attract huge attendances at rallies but score appallingly badly in opinion polls, along with his party”

    “This question is also absolutely central to the Labour leadership election, because the point of the election is to find a leader who can create the circumstances for labour to win in a general election”
    ________

    Constant bashing from the media and a party that constantly undermines its leader can be attributed to the current dire poll ratings. If the PLP have all the answers for leadership then why have they put forward a candidate who looks and sounds like Paul O’Grady? “If I wanted your opinion, I’d slap it outta ya” The guy is nightmare behind bifocals and I don’t mean ol Paul O’Grady.

  29. @Carfrew – thanks for the reply.

    I certainly think the media bias is an issue. Owen Jones was very good on this in his rather damning piece about Corbyn two days ago. His take backed up my own thoughts – media attacks on a left wing Labour leader are a given. There is no point complaining about this – you just need to get an extremely good media and comms operation up and running to try to counter this.

    Jones pointed out that Corbyn didn’t have a speechwriter (possibly still doesn’t) and that really, really shows. His acceptance speech was poorly focused and rambling, as are most of his public speeches. Labour’s messaging is non existant, and this really matters.

    Jones also pointed out the critical issues Corbyn needed to address immediately he was elected. Jones believes that ‘patriotism’ was the big one. I’m convinced that Corbyn loves this country and wants great things for it and it’s people, but he effectively vacated the field on this point and allowed the press acres of space to fill with their own, predetermined attack lines. The die is now cast in voters minds.

    Corbyn still, after nearly a year, doesn’t have any kind of coherent media strategy, and it is telling. Complaining that the media don’t like you is like complaining that winter will be colder than summer. It’s pointless. The point is you need to buy some warm clothes.

    On the point about whether or not people in the PLP backed him, I don’t think there is a single, definable story here. Certainly some MPs were out to get him come what may. Others gave reluctant, possibly half hearted support. There were and are some genuine supporters, but it looks like quite a large group who did their best, while having doubts.

    Yes, I think the move against him came too soon, but there are too many people with too varied stances to claim this is all the fault of the PLP. Corbyn didn’t carry enough of the PLP with him, nor even his own supporters and selected personal staff, and that does suggest that he wasn’t very good at the job.

    On the polls – yes, they have fallen further now, but no lower than they have been previously under Corbyn. Labour has averaged 31.4% since he became leader, and this has been an extended poor run. I don’t think it is justifiable to blame this all of the current plot.

    Corbyn’s personal ratings in Scotland are also truly awful. This is somewhere that Corbyn said he would make a difference, and a part of the UK electorate not normally known for paying much attention to ‘Westminster elites’, like the PLP. If he is getting net personal ratings of -47% in Scotland, then something is terribly wrong.

    Apologies if this all sounds a bit hysterical.

  30. @carfrew – see above. Of course they moved against him, but only after what many thought was a very poor EU campaign.

    It’s also true that quite a few MPs who backed his leadership turned against him, as did some of the staff he appointed, and a significant number of independent advisers he invited to work with the party, in several policy areas.

    I agree entirely that there were some Labour MPs determined to rock the boat from the start, but the coup would not have happened if many of his erstwhile supporters hadn’t also crossed the floor.

    The poll ratings have been dire since he was elected and have not gone anywhere, so focusing on the recent sub 30 scores is of less relevance – there was a polling problem even when the rebels were quiet.

    When very close friends and political allies of Corbyn like Owen Jones lay out in stark language where things have gone wrong, the Labour hiearchy and supporters should listen. Corbyn is swimming against multiple tides, but that doesn’t mean he can’t also be a poor swimmer

  31. @Alec

    We already did all this. You don’t have anything substantially new, it’s just gonna irritate Anthony for no good reason.

    I mean, Blair did sofa govt, cutting them out for years, they didn’t resign en masse. They’re complaining after the event, after a choreographed assault a only a year in, you surely gotta be wary of this.

    As for the media operation, we did that too. It’s early days, the party keep distracting, and as Roger M. pointed out, Corbyn wasn’t exactly left the best media operation.

    I don’t think poll ratings are all down to the plot, you’re ignoring the media. And maybe Corbs is lacklustre, but the real issue here, the possibility you are also ignoring, that PLP fear him being replaced by someone more favourable. That’s the elephant in your room. Even the left want him replaced, even he wants replacing, and the replacement threatens to sideline the careerists…

    You need to chew on that awhile really, Alec…

  32. I also think… some proportion. Osborne had tpnot one but two budgets fall apart, but peeps fret more if Corbs doesn’t sing the anthem…

  33. Alec

    “If he [Corbyn] is getting net personal ratings of -47% in Scotland, then something is terribly wrong. ”

    True. But in YG polls in 2014 Ed Miliband was getting net personal ratings in Scotland of -65.

    For Labour in Scotland, lots of things are terribly wrong – like the leaders, the MPs, the MSPs, the councillors, a number of the members – but above all – the voters!

  34. ROBIN

    In particular, [STV] doesn’t give the electorate much of a choice of candidate from within parties (supposedly one of its benefits), because there is a strong practical reason for parties to only put up as many candidates as they think they can get elected.

    That’s how it works in Ireland – though often Parties put up one more – the number they hope will get elected, than are sure that will be. This at least means you don’t get into the situation that you fail to win seats because you don’t have enough candidates as happened to PBP in West Belfast this year.

    But it’s worth pointing out that in Malta, which also uses STV, Parties not only put up more candidates than they expect to win, they put up more than there are seats in total. So in some 5-member Districts there may be up to 15 candidates from a single Party.

    https://www.gov.mt/en/Government/Government%20of%20Malta/Election%20Results/Pages/General-Election-2013-Results.aspx

    Effectively the two main Parties (PL and PN) run Primaries within the actual election. It’s made easier because of the structure of Maltese politics with two big Parties taking maybe 95% of the vote and very few voters switching their preferences between the two as they vote down the list or dropping out before all their Party’s candidates are preferenced.

    More generally STV gets fairer the more representatives each constituency has, though this also has downsides as well – either bigger constituencies or parliaments and certainly longer ballot papers. However the one thing you can’t say about STV is that the electorate don’t get a choice. The link between electorate and representative tends to highly developed, maybe too much so, and if Parties want to succeed, it needs to be cultivated. Unpopular candidates imposed will be ignored and votes placed elsewhere; popular ones deposed by the Party machine will stand as Independents and may win.

    People shouldn’t assume either that a Party needs to poll near ‘quota'[1] nationally, to end up with representatives. Because STV gives even small Parties and their candidates a chance to build up to vote in certain areas, they can still get some presence from a small national percentage – as the Greens and PBP do in Northern Ireland with less than 3%:

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/election/2016/northern_ireland/results

    [1] This is the percentage of the votes needed to elect one rep. So in a 5-member seat it will be 1/6th ie 16.67% and so on.

  35. @Alec

    I think you’re not getting answers because there’s an awful lot of cognitive dissonance going on here and elsewhere. The only way to continue in the belief that Corbyn is anything but a disaster is to flatly refuse to acknowledge the existence of the evidence to the contrary.

    People seem to forget that Blair didn’t exactly have an easy ride in the media. All of the Telegraph, Mail, Express, Sunday Times still supported Major (the Times was neutral). But Labour had a media rebuttal unit whose sole task was to instantly get Labour’s side of the story out to the media. They had an aggressive (in more ways than one) strategy for getting Labour’s agenda into the press.

    Of course, to do that such a unit would have to have at least a semblance of an idea what Labour’s side of the story might be, and would have to hope that Corbyn wouldn’t make a random statement directly contradicting party policy.

    As you and Jones say, instead of complaining Corbyn’s team should be doing something about it. But they don’t seem capable and/or interested.

    To give my answer to your question, the reason is that many thousands in all of the big cities still only adds up to a tiny proportion of the electorate. Enthusing your supporters is absolutely no use if that doesn’t take a positive message beyond that maybe 1% (at most). To win, Labour doesn’t need fanatical enthusiasm of a small minority (which will quite likely actually remind many older voters of mass industrial unrest and *dissuade* them from voting Labour). It needs the votes, no matter how grudging, of more people than will vote Tory.

    There was a hope, after his election, that Corbyn might connect with those who have become alienated from the political process. That was the basis for me putting him second on my leadership ballot. But we saw in the referendum campaign that he utterly failed to connect with them. Those voters, if they vote at all, seem no more likely to vote Labour than before. Instead Corbyn is connecting with those who were *already* politically motivated. But for every left-wing vote he picks up (e.g. from the Greens), he is likely losing twice as many from the centre-left.

  36. via Britain Elects

    EU referendum poll in (X):
    (Remain / Leave)
    DEU: 61 / 24
    FRA: 47 / 32
    DNK: 55 / 35
    SWE: 54 / 31
    FIN: 50 / 30
    (YouGov / 20 – 27 Jul)

  37. @RM

    Thanks for expanding. I knew a lot of that, but not all (e.g. Malta).

    I think a good start would be to move to STV in many council elections – especially those with multiple seats elected simultaneously. It would help to get the UK electorate familiar with other voting systems, which is a significant impediment to change.

    Could I ask our Scottish contributors what the general view is of the method used for UK elections, now that there has been substantial experience of a different system for the Scotiish Parliament?

  38. YG GB poll on EU

    https://d25d2506sfb94s.cloudfront.net/cumulus_uploads/document/sujw70moca/InternalResults_160229_EU_Website.pdf

    The remaining European Union countries should not agree any free trade deal with Britain at all 5%
    The remaining European Union countries should agree to a free trade deal with Britain, but only in exchange for them continuing to allow EU citizens to live and work in Britain 31%
    The remaining European Union countries should agree to a free trade deal with Britain without requiring them to give EU citizens the right to live and work in Britain 42%

    Dunno 22%

    Lots of optimists in the GB population! :-)

  39. @RM

    Thanks for expanding. I knew a lot of that, but not all (e.g. Malta).

    I think a good start would be to move to STV in many council elections – especially those with multiple seats elected simultaneously. It would help to get the UK electorate familiar with other voting systems, which is a significant impediment to change.

  40. @RM

    Thanks for expanding. I knew a lot of that, but not all (e.g. Malta).
    I had more comments, but I can’t find what is triggering automod

  41. Now, I may be wrong (has been known!) but isn’t there a difference between “a free trade deal” and “access to the Single Market” which YouGov have ignored/confused?

  42. via

    via Britain Elects (from YG)

    An EU deal with Britain should be…
    (Generous / Not generous):
    DEU: 31 / 54
    FRA: 26 / 54
    DNK: 50 / 35
    SWE: 43 / 40
    FIN: 28 / 52

  43. @Robin

    bit muddled and hence perpetuating.

    1) Blair may have handled the media better, but that doesn’t mean they didn’t get a much easier ride. Look what happened to Tories last term before relenting on Levinson.

    2) Corbs may not be good enough, but wasn’t a disaster. Grew the membership a lot and before the rebellion didn’t poll much different to Miliband despite hostile press and party. Also pulled other parties leftwards…

    3) But it’s missing the point if the MPs aren’t acting because he’s carp, but because his replacement may not be.

    It amazes that peeps think MPs might not behave this way. Look what happened to BoJo….

    I think as well, some think Corbs is carp because lukewarm on EU, they assume staying in EU is a good, but for many, leaving is a plus point for Labour in the future, makes life easier…

  44. And the YG article with a nice table comparing the “free trade” question options across the 6 member states.

    https://yougov.co.uk/news/2016/08/01/britain-collision-course-german-and-french-publics/

  45. @Robin

    “To win, Labour doesn’t need fanatical enthusiasm of a small minority”

    ———-

    It was the fanatical enthusiasm of a minority that Tories used to win the last election, by employing them tl micro-target switchers…

  46. @Colin

    Did you order more of those UKPR straws? It looks like demand is growing.

  47. @Carfrew

    Difficult to say whether Blair got an easier ride in part *because* he had an effective press strategy. But either way, Corbyn doesn’t seem to even have a press strategy, let alone an effective one.

    Growing the membership – good (in principle). But it still doesn’t help if our membership gets to 10m if no-one else votes Labour. Membership is only a good thing if they then do something effective – knock on doors, staff stalls, deliver leaflets.

    What policies have moved leftwards? Bombing Syria? More benefit cuts? Privatising the Land Registry? All that has happened is that Corbyn has vacated the centre ground, and the Tories can now use centre ground rhetoric while continuing doing what they always do.

    When growing numbers of his former supporters and allies say he’s carp, maybe – just maybe – it’s because he is carp?

  48. @ Alec and @ Robin

    I should have followed Carfrew’s point on just not engaging, but, here you are.

    The attempt to get rid of Corbyn was from day 1. Look at the date, and look at the references.

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-3308856/SIMON-DANCZUK-Watch-Citizen-Corbyn-moderates-march.html

    As to media … The Independent had an article yesterday on Owen Jones’s interview with Clive Lewis. The original title was:

    “Jeremy Corbyn has become an ‘unelectable leader’, close MP ally Clive Lewis says”

    now this was changed to

    “Claims that Jeremy Corbyn will fail have become a ‘self-fulfilling prophecy’, close MP ally Clive Lewis warns”,

    but they didn’t change the title on the main page. Actually neither title (or for that matter the content of the article) has any close resemblance to ththe interview.

    Note this is the Independent, which, according to the Birkbeck College research the least anti-Corbyn (roughly at the same level where the Mirror is).

    Any analogies with Blair’s media machine is a no starter. This is a different class.

  49. And it is a very strange that he was not expelled. Again look at the date and what he actually said. And with this I stop. . It is nothing to do with Corbyn’s skills or no skills, but an active sabotage. If the NEC elections turn out as expected, then it would be possible to move against these people, it would greatly benefit Labour in my opinion.

    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/tristram-hunt-tells-oxbridge-labour-students-that-the-top-1-per-cent-must-take-leadership-in-labour-a6717731.html

  50. @Robin

    No, it’s pretty easy to see press liked Blair’s policies and gave him an easy ride, hence Murdoch’s backing, and you can easily see what happened go Tories before and after relenting on Levinson.

    I agree the membership needs to be harnessed, but you need to have the membership first and it’s only a year in????????????? They just made £4m off the membership registering to vote…

    I agree it’s early days about moving leftwards and thus far unproven. But for even the rhetoric to change suggests summat might be going on.

    And, again, his carpness is a bit of a red herring…

1 8 9 10 11 12 13