The one I saw has Labour up SIX POINTS over the Tories!!

The fictional one you made up to give you an excuse to screech momentum somewhere else?

The YouGov one has had Labour leading but that's only by three points. And it's the only one that has them ahead, at least of the main lot.

Check Sam Coate's The Times opinion polls.

 

Sorry I read it wrong, three above the Tories but still!!!

If at this point it's going better than the Corbyn doubters had been expecting last year (not that their doubts aren't reasonable), then that's already swell with me.

Also worth adding that the main beneficiary of the fall in the Conservative vote has been...UKIP. Oh.

That's a horrifying thought.

Well thanks yo First Past the Post we only need Labour to be the biggest party tbh.

Well thanks yo First Past the Post we only need Labour to be the biggest party tbh.

Yes, but on the changed constituency boundaries and minus Scotland, Labour wouldn't be the biggest party unless they had a solid lead on the Conservatives.

But Scotland will support a labour leader in becoming prime minister to avoid 5 more years of the Tory c**ts so it's not all doom and gloom there

SNP would easily join with Labour.

Not join. That would undo their election strategy and give ScotLab a tiny air hole in their coffin.

 

Confidence and Supply is the way it would go down and the SNP were very clear about that at the last election.

You all remember what happened at last year's election with the whole prospect of Labour relying on the SNP, right?

 

God I'm so depressed.

https://mainlymacro.blogspot.co.uk/2016/02/...t-tendency.html

http://labourlist.org/2016/05/danny-dorlin...m-to-number-10/

The 'you can ignore Tories and just win on non-voters!' proposal has been critiqued to death SO MANY TIMES that it's infuriating someone thinks they can just sashay in and restate it without saying a thing about all the very, very pressing points against it (i.e. why do you think non-voters skew Labour rather than, say, UKIP? how do you focus your resources on the 'right' non-voters in that case? why do you think a man with communication nous so bad that the majority of the country doesn't know what he stands for (!) can win over people who don't pay attention to politics en masse? given the seats with the most non-voters tend to be Labour safe seats, what does that suggest about targeting non-voters as a practical winning strategy for actually winning seats?)

 

But no, god forbid we dirty ourselves by trying to persuade people who happened to think the Conservatives were the answer at the last election.

hmmm, well, that article is certainly one way of looking at it. A bit like the strategy of attacking Libdems when the party in opposition was the Tories. That worked beautifully. Targeting even smaller parties fulfills the law of diminishing returns. If you can't convince people who aren't registered as voters to register with your own policies you are doomed.

 

Lovely to see the Labour Party consider PR, given they wholeheartedly did a complete spiteful two-faced about-turn on it when given the opportunity in a REFERENDUM. Smacks more of realisation that we are condemned as a nation to Toryism offering up the vague hope that the current gov might implode before 2020 as some sort of left-wing hope of salvation. I hardly think a party campaigning that it thinks hung parliaments are the only way it can get in government is going to convince voters.

 

Also, just to observe there hasn't been a left-wing government of significance since the middle of the 20th century, when the poor were really poor and felt a community spirit to support the party that catered for their interests. Labour in those days was NOT viewed as a party for the well-off. The proportion of poverty-stricken people in the country has dropped significantly since those days, not least thanks to the Labour Party itself, so that basic strategy is self-fulfillingly short-term: any government set about removing poverty will in the end have to adapt to appealing to the now-better-off who are no longer living in houses with no heating, outside toilets, no car, no mod-cons, coal fires, no hot water bath facilities, decent food and clothing.

 

You have to appeal to those who ARE better off but still willing to accept legislation to drag those in need up a bit in the pecking order. Any other way of doing it is not going to work.

 

 

The Lib Dems have tried the strategy of appealing to non-voters. It was a waste of time. Many of those voters fall into the "You're all the same" category. If you do enough to demonstrate that you are not the same as the rest (and you need to do a lot as these are typically people who have little to no interest in politics) then you risk alienating your existing support.

Exactly, in order to win another election Labour need to appeal to voters in the deep south who are voting conservative (and not just London - where they have traditionally always done well) as well as those in the north who voted UKIP last time, and stop talking to themselves, and by actually engaging these people without insulting them (i.e. these people are bigots). Without doing this then Jess Phillips is correct: there is absolutely no hope of winning the 2020 election.

 

Thinking otherwise is just sticking your head in the sand and ignoring all of the GLARING evidence.

Survation for Mail on Sunday:

 

CON 32% LAB 32% UKIP 16% LD 9% AP 11%