Support NeoGAF

[Lime]

YouGov did a survey which Huffington Post UK did an article on - much more at the link

Most people say the Tories have the best policies on the economy, but the largest share of people prefer ideas actually espoused by Jeremy Corbyn’s Labour, according to a new poll.

Nearly half (45%) of people surveyed by YouGov said they want the government to increase public spending and raise taxes for the wealthiest people - both of which are policies called for by Labour.

Despite Labour prioritising ‘an economy that works for all’ as point one of Jeremy Corbyn’s ten point plan at its recent conference, the poll commissioned by the Media Reform Coalition (MRC) shows that while more people back Labour’s anti-austerity approach than any other, this doesn’t translate into support for the party on the issue of austerity.

The poll also found 58% of people oppose any form of private sector involvement in the NHS while 51% support some degree of public ownership of the railways, both ideas also in Labour’s manifesto but broadly opposed by the Tories.

Yet when asked which party would be better at “overseeing the balance between public and private ownership”, more people thought the Conservatives would be better at achieving the balance they wanted (24%), rather than Labour (16%).

The MRC claimed this showed a “worrying disconnect” between the policies voters support and which parties they associate with those policies.

Justin Schlosberg, Chair of the MRC, said: “We feel that much of the media have been more preoccupied with dismissing Jeremy Corbyn as ‘unelectable’ than with seriously reporting on the policies he represents.

“Since the economy is often the issue that wins or loses general elections, it is imperative that journalists now give due attention and scrutiny to the economic alternatives put forward by the official opposition, as well as other anti-austerity parties.

“This is not about a failure of communication on the part of Labour so much as a failure of nerve on the part of a great swathe of the news media. Without a change in approach, our democracy is in deep crisis.”

Greenslade told HuffPost UK that Corbyn’s portrayal in much of the British media was a concern. “It’s undoubtably true that the overwhelming majority of mainstream media outlets are antagonistic, and sometimes openly hostile, to Corbyn and his wing at the Labour party.”

“Corybn represents something that the largely right-wing press believed was dead and buried, which is a socialist alternative to capitalism, that’s what really worries them.”

Asked whether this was of concern, he said: “That goes to a deeper question about the nature of press ownership and press freedom. It’s a large question. We have an openly partisan press, and people surely are aware of that. They choose the read the titles which reflect their views. And if they want to look elsewhere, at the BBC or something that is taken to be impartial, they can.”

http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/ent...a-policies-labour_uk_57fe651be4b0010a7f3da76b

 

[Goodlife]

Not even vaguely suprised

 

[Juicy Bob]

I've never voted Labour before (at least not in the UK). But if there was an election tomorrow, with Corbyn at the helm, I would seriously consider voting for them.

 

[CyclopsRock]

The MRCs conclusion appears to assume a disconnect between the policies and parties, rather than a far more plausible association between "Labour" and "burning pile of ashy leaves". It doesn't really matter how much you like a policy if you don't think the clown car can even make it round the bend into No 10.

 

[ClosingADoor]

“This is not about a failure of communication on the part of Labour so much as a failure of nerve on the part of a great swathe of the news media. Without a change in approach, our democracy is in deep crisis.”

This seems a bit strange to me, blaming the media instead of the party itself. A good politician should be able to bring his message across.

As with most politics, it's more about how you bring it, then what you are saying. And from what I have seen of Corbyn, he just isn't good at that. Issue with a lot of left wing parties in Europe though compared to the right. They have a problem getting their message across and have a reputation of spending government money in useless ways they can't seem to break out of.

 

[Maledict]

This seems a bit strange to me, blaming the media instead of the party itself. A good politician should be able to bring his message across.

As with most politics, it's more about how you bring it, then what you are saying. And from what I have seen of Corbyn, he just isn't good at that. Issue with a lot of left wing parties in Europe though compared to the right. They have a problem getting their message across and have a reputation of spending government money in useless ways they can't seem to break out of.

Yep. Blair swung the country to the left, as much as his detractors hate him for it, and he did it through a slick as hell media operation. Sometimes good intentions aren't enough, you need professionalism and skills.

And not to be a burning pile of ashy leaves of course... ;-)

 

[Ushojax]

Corbyn is not capable of running a political party, never mind the country. Anti-austerity policies are all well and good but you need to be a credible PM-in-waiting if you want people to vote for you. Corbyn has spent most of his life as an irrelevant backbench MP and he has shown absolutely zero competence as leader of a major party.

SOAS students and aged union leaders might not be bothered but a man who can't even get the basic administrative functions of his office in order, is not cut out to be PM. Add to that his complete unwillingness to 'play the game' and put himself out there in the mainstream media, he is never going to win an election. Without Daily Mail readers you aren't going to go anywhere, Corbyn is happy to live in his Islington bubble and McDonnel and Milne prevent anyone from puncturing it.

 

[Detox]

The media should take a major part of the blame. Most people in England are fickle and will swallow any lie the papers make up as shown by the success of the brexit campaign. The same media that spread brexit bullshit will never support Corbyn.

We'll see how labour handles it in the run up to an election.

 

[Morat]

Shocking. Perhaps [whisper it] that's why some people support him, as opposed to because they are a mob of Trotskiyst cultists. And perhaps the party would not be up such a shit creek if it had tried at least a little to work with Corbyn, rather than taking every attempt to discredit him, and as a consequence the party as a whole.

 

[darkace]

Shocking news, populist policies are easy to sell. The actual impact of Corbyn's policies would be terrible unless you're a fan of soaking the rich for shits and giggles.

 

[RangerX]

Of course they do. They are decent, fair socialist policies. The media have drummed into peoples heads that they shouldn't like the man. I'd vote for him in a heartbeat if he was here in Ireland.

 

[Ushojax]

The media should take a major part of the blame. Most people in England are fickle and will swallow any lie the papers make up as shown by the success of the brexit campaign. The same media that spread brexit bullshit will never support Corbyn.

We'll see how labour handles it in the run up to an election.

Corbyn should take all of the blame for being a coward who is not willing to put himself out there. By completely avoiding any interaction with the right-wing press he has given them free reign to caricature him as a deranged Trotskyist who is so left-wing he couldn't even bring himself to shoot a terrorist during a Mumbai-style attack.

The default setting of the UK is Conservative, that is what people like Corbyn do not understand. Changing that will take decades and require a Labour leader vastly more pragmatic, charismatic and competent than Corbyn. Tony Blair is a monstrous cunt but he's right that elections are won from the centre ground, the first priority for Labour should be getting into power. Without power you can't actually help anyone.

 

[travisbickle]

Corbyn is not capable of running a political party, never mind the country. Anti-austerity policies are all well and good but you need to be a credible PM-in-waiting if you want people to vote for you. Corbyn has spent most of his life as an irrelevant backbench MP and he has shown absolutely zero competence as leader of a major party.

SOAS students and aged union leaders might not be bothered but a man who can't even get the basic administrative functions of his office in order, is not cut out to be PM. Add to that his complete unwillingness to 'play the game' and put himself out there in the mainstream media, he is never going to win an election. Without Daily Mail readers you aren't going to go anywhere, Corbyn is happy to live in his Islington bubble and McDonnel and Milne prevent anyone from puncturing it.

I don't even know what game Corbyn would have to play to get positive, or at least neutral, coverage in the Daily Mail?

And I'd probably add Corbyn isn't happy in his Islington bubble considering every time I hear about him he's in another constituency.

 

[Stop It]

Not even vaguely suprised

Nor me.

I oppose many of the current Labour policies, especially the return to "protecting key industries" (Read: jobs for the union boys) and nationisation and protectionism. I believe that centre left policies worked and the decimation of public services need to be reversed, which were part of the Labour platform anyway.

But I've heard so much rubbish from Brexiteers especially, parroting Corbyn policies but then saying they hate Labour. It's hilarious how politically illiterate people have skewed the narrative of politics here and hear what they want to hear from their preferred politicians even when the exact opposite is true.

Public services should be protected they say, but then balk at paying for them. They want to save the NHS but support a government that has a hardcore that despises it. They want people to pay their fair share of taxes as long as it isn't them.

I think people want to vote Tory but want Labour policies, because reasons.

 

[hydrophilic attack]

The UK media do seem to be uniquely shit.

 

[Agent Gibbs]

Whilst many (including myself) may agree with the policies (I would love to renationalise railways, transport etc), its not always as simple as liking the idea; When the party and leadership give off the impression of a badly ran parish council it does not inspire the confidence that they could actually be effective leadership.

Then there is the realities of some policies, the sheer cost to renationalise/buy back all those industries is quite unrealistic, so when you start questioning if some of the idealistic polices would actually occur should they win along side your confidence of their leadership abilities, you end up with the current situation labour is in, where despite good intentions they are not winning anything or endearing the masses to them.

what Labour need to do is stop the petty infighting and that stems to both bloody sides, quite frankly I'm sick of people saying "you blairites need to fall in line and support the leader" Blarites are more centre leaning LABOUR members/polticians etc, throwing round petty, meaningless insults within your own party to people who don't share the exact same view is a massive massive turn off to other members, who then feel marginalised. Both sides need to suck it up and find the common ground and compromise to form an effective strong and capable opposition, because right now it seems some would be quite happy to cut the party in two

 

[War Peaceman]

What are Jeremy Corbyn's policies?

I know a few broad areas, but there is very little detail.

 

[Gawge]

Can you imagine the headlines of The Sun, The Daily Mail, The Express, and most other papers if Labour was presiding over the tumbling of the Pound and shop shelves not being stacked? There would be an overwhelming feeling of national crisis, immediate calls for an election or temporary government.

Instead, there is mild outrage and balance.

There are decades of deference given to Tories as being "capable", "competent" and other variations. It's so deeply ingrained in people from the media coverage.

 

[Agent Gibbs]

Nor me.

I oppose many of the current Labour policies, especially the return to "protecting key industries" (Read: jobs for the union boys) and nationisation and protectionism. I believe that centre left policies worked and the decimation of public services need to be reversed, which were part of the Labour platform anyway.

But I've heard so much rubbish from Brexiteers especially, parroting Corbyn policies but then saying they hate Labour. It's hilarious how politically illiterate people have skewed the narrative of politics here and hear what they want to hear from their preferred politicians even when the exact opposite is true.

Public services should be protected they say, but then balk at paying for them. They want to save the NHS but support a government that has a hardcore that despises it. They want people to pay their fair share of taxes as long as it isn't them.

I think people want to vote Tory but want Labour policies, because reasons.

Good lord yes on the bolded! People constantly moan about local council services being shit, but they aren't willing to stump up more money in tax to provide more money for those same services!
The media has created this frankly disgusting misconception that the vast majority of the tax goes to pension pots and gold plated this and that, when in reality it does not. Sure the public sector have a much better pension, but they also get paid considerably less than their private sector equivalent - I'm an engineer for local government, the same job as me in the private sector gets paid about 40% more than I do, and technically do less work; I do the normal engineering role but also have to answer quires and requests from members of the public. Its a case of lower pay but higher pension compared to higher pay and private pension - they've set the common man up against one another to distract us from the real issues surrounding funding of the public sector services.

as fro your last point, I feel that ties into my point previously, the apparent strength of leadership and the confidence it brings

 

[Morat]

. Both sides need to suck it up and find the common ground and compromise to form an effective strong and capable opposition, because right now it seems some would be quite happy to cut the party in two

Completely agree on this point. It's bloody ridiculous and only damages the party as whole while letting the nastiest Tory government in ages get its way. Neither side is blameless here.

 

[hydrophilic attack]

they've set the common man up against one another to distract us from the real issues

classic right-wing strategy

same reason they're stoking hate against immigrants

 

[Condom]

Shocking news, populist policies are easy to sell. The actual impact of Corbyn's policies would be terrible unless you're a fan of soaking the rich for shits and giggles.

Public housing? Decent healthcare? Affordable public transport? Populist nonsense and just 'shit's and giggles'!

For others it's their livelihood and for the pawns of the elite like you, it's a damn joke. Hahaha fucking poor people and their troubles right mate?

Let's all join Darkace and his genius idea of helping the poor by making their life even more miserable and enforce a compulsary reading of Atlas Shrugged.

 

[PJV3]

I'm not exactly impressed with Corbyn but when the population is more interested in taking the opposition to task for Bacon buttie eating than offing dying disabled work avoiders, it's not surprising.

 

[Pie and Beans]

Because anyone else other than Corbyn may be able to achieve some of them, as opposed to failing to reshuffle cabinet, put out press releases, or even just sit on a train like a fucking normal person without turning it into a Last of the Summer Wine situation.

 

[Hazzuh]

1) This is only polling a small subset of Corbyn's policies. Do the public also support unilateral nuclear disarmament for example? Do they support his immigration policy? It doesn't matter if you agree with Labour policy in one area if they are totally toxic in every other area.

2) This ignores that the public don't consider policies individually but rather as a collection. In the past the Labour party had the problem that people supported each of the individual tax increases they were suggesting but when they were all taken together it made people feel like soon they were the ones who were going to have to pay more tax. If you promise to spend more in every area then people will think you are taking them for a ride even if they think that money is needed.

3) It totally ignores that Jeremy Corbyn is incapable of delivering on any of his policies because he is incapable of leading a political party let alone a government. He is the worst politician to become a leader of a major political party in Britain since WW2 at least.

4) Putting everything else aside Corbyn's associations with the IRA, the Iranian state, antisemites etc mean that he can never win an election.

5) It is a politician's fault if they can't communicate clearly. Corbyn's team can't even get a press release out on time.

 

[Tadaima]

SOAS students and aged union leaders might not be bothered but a man who can't even get the basic administrative functions of his office in order, is not cut out to be PM. Add to that his complete unwillingness to 'play the game' and put himself out there in the mainstream media, he is never going to win an election. Without Daily Mail readers you aren't going to go anywhere, Corbyn is happy to live in his Islington bubble and McDonnel and Milne prevent anyone from puncturing it.

There's no need to single out SOAS.

 

[LordRaptor]

Shocking news, populist policies are easy to sell. The actual impact of Corbyn's policies would be terrible unless you're a fan of soaking the rich for shits and giggles.

The actual impact of austerity is and continues to be fucking terrible and led directly to a winning Brexit vote which also continues to be fucking terrible.

So how much worse would the impact of those policies be?

 

[Maledict]

The actual impact of austerity is and continues to be fucking terrible and led directly to a winning Brexit vote which also continues to be fucking terrible.

So how much worse would the impact of those policies be?

There's basically no evidence that austerity was linked to the Brexit vote. Whilst some areas hard hit by austerity went Brexit, so did areas that are basically untouched. I'd love it if it were true but the facts on the ground don't bear it out right now.

 

[GeordieMark]

So JC is clearly doing a crap job of communicating his policies to the electorate. The Labour Party only have themselves to blame for this.

 

[darkace]

Public housing? Decent healthcare? Affordable public transport? Populist nonsense and just 'shit's and giggles'!

With the exception of public housing, which is terrible policy that feels good and makes things worse, everybody wants the rest. It's not a question of what we want, it's how we go about doing these things. And Corbyn's policies, his actual method of implementing his ideals, are fucking awful.

For others it's their livelihood and for the pawns of the elite like you, it's a damn joke. Hahaha fucking poor people and their troubles right mate?

Yes you've got me I don't care about the poor.

Let's all join Darkace and his genius idea of helping the poor by making their life even more miserable and enforce a compulsary reading of Atlas Shrugged.

I think you've missed my ideological leanings slightly.

 

[Zemm]

Who cares about policy? How does he eat a bacon butty?

 

[Walshicus]

So JC is clearly doing a crap job of communicating his policies to the electorate. The Labour Party only have themselves to blame for this.

It's hard to bypass a hostile media.

And given how much of the country is dog stupid enough to believe said media, only goes to show that you get the government you deserve.

 

[KahooTs]

You can account for those results in a number of ways, telling is the eagerness with which the fringe left embrace the angle that people are too stupid to realise what's good for them.

 

[LordRaptor]

There's basically no evidence that austerity was linked to the Brexit vote. Whilst some areas hard hit by austerity went Brexit, so did areas that are basically untouched. I'd love it if it were true but the facts on the ground don't bear it out right now.

Many of peoples stated reasons for voting Leave were directly related to austerity measures.
At the surface level you can blame the right-leaning tabloid press for deflecting the blame onto topics like immigration, but the underlying cause is austerity.

e:
I'll concede that the reasons people publically gave for their vote may not be what they actually believe however.

 

[travisbickle]

Raising taxes on the wealthy isn't populist. It's a common sense economic strategy.

Populist is leaving the EU without a fucking plan.

 

[darkace]

The actual impact of austerity is and continues to be fucking terrible and led directly to a winning Brexit vote which also continues to be fucking terrible.

So how much worse would the impact of those policies be?

I see no evidence tying Brexit and austerity together.

Raising taxes on the wealthy isn't populist. It's a common sense economic strategy.

These are the exact same thing.

 

[freeofgreed]

I see no evidence tying Brexit and austerity together.



These are the exact same thing.

Lol next you're going to say a progressive tax system is populist as well huh?

 

[Coriolanus]

You can account for those results in a number of ways, telling is the eagerness with which the fringe left embrace the angle that people are too stupid to realise what's good for them.

i mean, the majority did vote for brexit.

 

[LordRaptor]

I see no evidence tying Brexit and austerity together.

As I said, the reasons people gave were primarily economic, not nationalistic.
People were openly misled about things like the NHS being underfunded being because of all the money we spend on the EU, and not the actual reason being the politically motivated dismantling of the public sector by our government under the guise of austerity "fixes".

 

[darkace]

Lol next you're going to say a progressive tax system is populist as well huh?

Can be. Sanders' was. Corbyns' is. More progressivity isn't inherently good. Excluding government transfers, the US tax system is one of the most progressive in the world and it's terrible. The Scandinavian are some of the least progressive and they're some of the best. Progressivity usually comes at a cost of efficiency, which harms everyone.

 

[Maledict]

As I said, the reasons people gave were primarily economic, not nationalistic.
People were openly misled about things like the NHS being underfunded being because of all the money we spend on the EU, and not the actual reason being the politically motivated dismantling of the public sector by our government under the guise of austerity "fixes".

No, the number one reason for voting leave was immigration.

 

[His Majesty]

Lol next you're going to say a progressive tax system is populist as well huh?

'Raise taxes for the wealthiest' is without a doubt a populist measure. It resonates very well with the masses because they assume the budgetary problems can be fixed without having to contribute themselves. Hollande used it as a selling point in his 2012 presidential campaign. Two years later it turned out to be a failure and he had to reverse his decisions.

 

[travisbickle]

These are the exact same thing.

Populist is what we are seeing in the US with Trump. Politics that are removed from policy, and reality, and appeal to anxieties of the populace. With politicians whom usually target someone/thing not at fault (Chinese, immigrants ....). Or closer to home, Brexit.

 

[freeofgreed]

Can be. Sanders' was. Corbyns' is. More progressivity isn't inherently good. Excluding government transfers, the US tax system is one of the most progressive in the world and it's terrible. The Scandinavian are some of the least progressive and they're some of the best. Progressivity usually comes at a cost of efficiency, which harms everyone.

What metric are you using? Source?

'Raise taxes for the wealthiest' is without a doubt a populist measure. Hollande used it as a selling point in his 2012 presidential campaign. Two years later it turned out to be a failure and he had to revert his decisions.

Do you know what populism is? Having the wealthy pay more taxes isn't just lip-services that politicians can use to get elected. It's an extremely common form of taxation used in just about every country in the world. I.e. progressive taxes. It's hard to take you seriously, when you're straight up calling progressive taxes populist

 

[LordRaptor]

No, the number one reason for voting leave was immigration.

Yes, but that in itself is a big complicated topic.
Again, reasons people have given publically related to immigration are economic ones; "taking jobs", "over burdening social security", "taking affordable housing". These are the results of austerity measures, even if - as I said - segments of the press were happy to deflect that blame onto immigrants.

I am not denying that for some people "immigration" is a codeword for "no black in the union jack".

A significant percentage of those who voted Leave did so on primarily economic grounds however, or at least have the shame to hide their racism when polled.

 

[Billy_Pilgrim]

His economic policies aren't the problem. The problem is his foreign policy and his complete inability to function like a responsible human.

 

[Stop It]

Many of peoples stated reasons for voting Leave were directly related to austerity measures.
At the surface level you can blame the right-leaning tabloid press for deflecting the blame onto topics like immigration, but the underlying cause is austerity.

e:
I'll concede that the reasons people publically gave for their vote may not be what they actually believe however.

People voted for austerity. They then wondered why public services were being decimated, they fell hook line of sinker for the Tory/Right wing press line blaming immigration.

It wasn't because of devastating budget cuts to councils, social housing and other public services, no it was people who contribution was a net benefit to the country.

Of course not only did the public buy this bollocks by putting Cameron in with a majority in 2015, they then voted Brexit on the utter lie that it would mean more money for the NHS.

The public want a socialist platform but the media have told them that is such a bad idea they vote the opposite, then complain bitterly about losing the safety net Labour tried to repair from 1997 to 2010. I can't wait for the fallout post Brexit when the media start to run out of excuses. Well they'll blame the EU and people will buy it, vote Tory again and still wonder why their government doesn't give a toss about them.

 

[Snarfington]

I like the current Labour policies but I feel that Corbin is likely to be completely ineffective at leading a government that can make them work. It would take a big turnaround on that for me to vote for them right now.

 

[Charles Brandon]

he's not getting elected mate. It would be much better for all concerned if he simply stopped breathing.

 

[Goodlife]

he's not getting elected mate. It would be much better for all concerned if he simply stopped breathing.

Really?