General Election December, 2019 (U.K.)

splinter65

20Cent wrote: »

Whoever was leader of the Labour party would have had the same or similar smears against them as Corbyn did. The problem is with the press in the UK and the public need to get better are sifting through the b's to inform themselves.

Do you want Mr Corbyn to remain as leader of the Labour Party to fight the next GE? Why did the voters choose Johnson despite all the bad press coverage he got?

quokula

splinter65 wrote: »

Do you want Mr Corbyn to remain as leader of the Labour Party to fight the next GE? Why did the voters choose Johnson despite all the bad press coverage he got?

Because the statement you're making is categorically false - Johnson got positive coverage while Corbyn got overwhelmingly negative.

https://www.lboro.ac.uk/news-events/general-election/report-4/

There's lots of graphs and data in there but a key one is this:




Or to break it down into a couple of memorable anecdotes:

When it was revealed in an interview that Corbyn spends Christmas day volunteering at a homeless shelter, the headlines that came out of it focussed on his failure to watch the Queen's Speech.

When Boris Johnson took a phone away from a reporter who tried to show him a sick child that was suffering due to his government's cuts to healthcare, the BBC's chief political correspondent changed the main story of the day by uncritically repeating a completely fabricated lie from the conservatives that one of their representatives was punched by a labour supporter at the hospital in question.

Or to give one more example

Lefty Bicek

Time to stop making excuses, surely ?

splinter65

quokula wrote: »

Because the statement you're making is categorically false - Johnson got positive coverage while Corbyn got overwhelmingly negative.

https://www.lboro.ac.uk/news-events/general-election/report-4/

There's lots of graphs and data in there but a key one is this:




Or to break it down into a couple of memorable anecdotes:

When it was revealed in an interview that Corbyn spends Christmas day volunteering at a homeless shelter, the headlines that came out of it focussed on his failure to watch the Queen's Speech.

When Boris Johnson took a phone away from a reporter who tried to show him a sick child that was suffering due to his government's cuts to healthcare, the BBC's chief political correspondent changed the main story of the day by uncritically repeating a completely fabricated lie from the conservatives that one of their representatives was punched by a labour supporter at the hospital in question.

Or to give one more example

Instead of accepting that for nearly 10 years now and over a long series of local, EU and GEs and referendums, the Citizens of the UK quite clearly do NOT want the Labour Party in its current format in power, you choose to lay the blame at the door of the BBC?!?
Carry on though. It’s a pity. As someone else said the UK operates best with a good strong opposition but while you continue to deny that the emperor has no clothes then your party will continue to fracture and crumble until there maybe nothing left.

Labour are clearly quite serious about learning from their election defeat. That's why they've decided to place Ed Miliband, another failure, on the board to learn why they failed.

You couldn't make this stuff up.

https://twitter.com/guardiannews/status/1209062223852818433

quokula

splinter65 wrote: »

Instead of accepting that for nearly 10 years now and over a long series of local, EU and GEs and referendums, the Citizens of the UK quite clearly do NOT want the Labour Party in its current format in power, you choose to lay the blame at the door of the BBC?!?
Carry on though. It’s a pity. As someone else said the UK operates best with a good strong opposition but while you continue to deny that the emperor has no clothes then your party will continue to fracture and crumble until there maybe nothing left.

I was just replying to your previous post when you tried to make the demonstrably false claim that the Johnson was elected in spite of bad media coverage.

Joe_ Public

Dont think anybody is suggesting or should be suggesting that an inarguably hostile media was solely responsible for labours terrible defeat. But it was a contributing factor nonetheless so there is nothing wrong with it being raised as an issue. Just looking back over some of the election coverage and the treatment of stormzy in the meantime would lead me close to despair for the press in that country. Labour have a lot of soul searching and self critical analysis to conduct over the coming months, but how to cope with an overwhelmingly biased and unfair national press will be a big question for any potential leader. Will it be as simple as sucking up to the worlds most powerful media magnate and getting him on speed dial? I doubt it very much.

I think twitter has made things worse. The lack of rigour and integrity that pollutes those channels is seeping ever more gradually into mainstream media outlets so that even the more respected ones are shedding their standards. How much rigour, for example, went into that Times piece referenced above? Not very much i would wager but it fits the zeitgeist quite snugly. It feels like it should be true so therefore it must be true. These are the times we live in.

Joe_ Public

Joe_ Public wrote: »

Dont think anybody is suggesting or should be suggesting that an inarguably hostile media was solely responsible for labours terrible defeat. But it was a contributing factor nonetheless so there is nothing wrong with it being raised as an issue. Just looking back over some of the election coverage and the treatment of stormzy in the meantime would lead me close to despair for the press in that country. Labour have a lot of soul searching and self critical analysis to conduct over the coming months, but how to cope with an overwhelmingly biased and unfair national press will be a big question for any potential leader. Will it be as simple as sucking up to the worlds most powerful media magnate and getting him on speed dial? I doubt it very much.

Where is the evidence that 20% more media exposure to the Tories results in more voters for that party?

Isn't it concievable that 20% more media exposure to the Tories could actually turn more people off them when they see their policies, MPs etc.

Why is it always assumed more media exposure always = more favourable results.

Joe_ Public

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Where is the evidence that 20% more media exposure to the Tories results in more voters for that party?

Isn't it concievable that 20% more media exposure to the Tories could actually turn more people off them when they see their policies, MPs etc.

Why is it always assumed more media exposure always = more favourable results.

I dont know. I guess I'm merely assuming that when the msm is so overwhelmingly hostile towards one party it will usually lead to the other party faring incalculably better, an assumption also predicated on the fact that when that same msm for once weighed in behind the opposition, the opposition actually won. I dont know what kind of figure you can possibly put on the extent of that influence but i would be ready to be mildly shocked at how big it is.

quokula

Joe_ Public wrote: »

I dont know. I guess I'm merely assuming that when the msm is so overwhelmingly hostile towards one party it will usually lead to the other party faring incalculably better, an assumption also predicated on the fact that when that same msm for once weighed in behind the opposition, the opposition actually won. I dont know what kind of figure you can possibly put on the extent of that influence but i would be ready to be mildly shocked at how big it is.

These are the same people who voted in large numbers for Brexit (far more than 52% because that includes Scotland which held strongly for SNP, and cities like London & Liverpool which held strongly for Labour) when the same media told them to.

Whatever you feel about Labour or Corbyn, a vanishingly small percentage of people (though not all of course) who aren't immersed in that particular cesspit of propaganda think Brexit is a good idea, or think the EU was to blame for it. There is widespread recognition on this side of the Irish Sea, and amongst more progressive UK papers like the Guardian, that the combination of propaganda from the media, a dereliction of duty from the BBC, and widespread lies from the leave campaign led by Dominic Cummings played a pivotal role in that particular result.

All of the exact same factors are at play this time round, and achieved exactly the same demographic split, but the likes of the Lib Dems and the right wing of the Labour party, the ones who banged the drum hardest about the referendum result being tainted, don't want to bring it up this time because the narrative that everything was Corbyn's fault suits them.

Roger_007

There is a lot of comment on this thread as to what role the media played in the defeat of Labour in the GE. I don’t think it mattered at all what stance the media took, the reason why Labour lost is because the electorate in the UK are overwhelmingly conservative either with a small ‘c’ or with a large ‘C’ .
Labour can only win if it shifts more to the political centre with its policies and leadership. Labour defeated themselves by moving sharply to the left. They were blinded by an apparent ‘good’ result in 2017. That result came about because the Tories ran the most inept campaign in their history and still finished well ahead of Labour.
Labour will never win a GE with a hard left leadership and hard left policies. It doesn’t matter what sort of media coverage they get.

SharpshooterTom

If anyone is interested in how the election map would look by the different age groups (courtesy of electionmapsuk) - notice how different Scotland looks for the 18-24 year olds and the 65+ age group! :eek:

The wealthiest in the UK are putting their money where their mouths are, Brexit supporting parties raked it in in the final days before polling day. So some people are certainly going to benefit from Brexit.

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-politics-50898007

The Conservative Party received £1.4m in donations in the final two days of the general election campaign, according to the Electoral Commission.
The SNP got £14,929 and the Brexit Party £50,000, according to the register of donations above £7,500.
The biggest donor was Phones4U founder John Caudwell, who gave the Conservatives £500,000.
Labour, the Lib Dems and other parties did not get any donations above £7,500 in the final two days.

L1011

The relatively lack of difference in NI for the 18-24 and what actually happened is interesting. DUP lose the last Belfast seat to Alliance and another to the UUP but that's it.

ThomasFlynn

ThomasFlynn wrote: »

If anyone is interested in how the election map would look by the different age groups (courtesy of electionmapsuk) - notice how different Scotland looks for the 18-24 year olds and the 65+ age group! :eek:

Much of the 18-24 voting pattern can be simply put down to "rebelling against their parents" stage of life, with the MSM telling them to vote Tory, they do the exact opposite.

SharpshooterTom

L1011 wrote: »

The relatively lack of difference in NI for the 18-24 and what actually happened is interesting. DUP lose the last Belfast seat to Alliance and another to the UUP but that's it.

I'm not entirely sure I believe some of those, the Alliance surge in unionist areas was largely down to young people.

Also Upper Bann and East Londonderry both have significant nationalist populations even now, and I think with the younger generation catholics are in the majority or close to it in those constituencies.

SharpshooterTom

Here's another one.

Joe_ Public

ThomasFlynn wrote: »

Here's another one.

The thing to note also is that there are a hell of a lot more older voters voting than younger ones. So winning the young vote sounds very nice and progressive but it's not going to win many elections on its own. With no chance in the foreseeable of getting voting age down to 16, opposition are going to have to come up with some way of getting the youth vote to turn out in numbers or change the model entirely.

quokula

Joe_ Public wrote: »

The thing to note also is that there are a hell of a lot more older voters voting than younger ones. So winning the young vote sounds very nice and progressive but it's not going to win many elections on its own. With no chance in the foreseeable of getting voting age down to 16, opposition are going to have to come up with some way of getting the youth vote to turn out in numbers or change the model entirely.

It's worth pointing out that when they talk about the "youth vote" that's not just teenagers or students - Labour have a strong majority in the 25-49 demographic too. In other words that's most of the working population. They still get outnumbered by pensioners coming out in force for the Conservatives though.

quokula

quokula wrote: »

It's worth pointing out that when they talk about the "youth vote" that's not just teenagers or students - Labour have a strong majority in the 25-49 demographic too. In other words that's most of the working population. They still get outnumbered by pensioners coming out in force for the Conservatives though.

This group clearly don't trust labour with their pensions, and prove it time and time again at the ballot box,

beggars_bush

Deleted User wrote: »

The wealthiest in the UK are putting their money where their mouths are, Brexit supporting parties raked it in in the final days before polling day. So some people are certainly going to benefit from Brexit.

You'd hope that people who don't vote Tory would actually boycott those company owners who donated such large sums to them

AllForIt

20Cent wrote: »

Whoever was leader of the Labour party would have had the same or similar smears against them as Corbyn did. The problem is with the press in the UK and the public need to get better are sifting through the b's to inform themselves.

They did. That's why they voted for an Islamophobic, homophobic, racist narcissist as their PM.

Capt'n Midnight

ThomasFlynn wrote: »

If anyone is interested in how the election map would look by the different age groups (courtesy of electionmapsuk) - notice how different Scotland looks for the 18-24 year olds and the 65+ age group! :eek:

Lord Heseltine pointed out that Tory voters were dying off at 2% a year.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/conservative-voters-dying-off-lord-michael-heseltine-tory-part-elderly-support-base-pensioners-a7798386.html

Also it should be noted that Labour vote being down affected the result more than any changes in the Tory vote.

Demographic time bomb in the UK.

Irish Praetorian

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

Lord Heseltine pointed out that Tory voters were dying off at 2% a year.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/conservative-voters-dying-off-lord-michael-heseltine-tory-part-elderly-support-base-pensioners-a7798386.html

Also it should be noted that Labour vote being down affected the result more than any changes in the Tory vote.

Demographic time bomb in the UK.

Bear in mind there are going from 55-59 year olds to 60-64 over the next five years than there will be 15-19 year olds going to 20-24. Young people might be more liberal but they make up a shrinking proportion of the UK and most Western states.

Rjd2

https://www.youtube.com/user/thatcheritescot/search?query=labour+the+wilderness+years

This guy uploaded a series called labour the wilderness years which initially aired around 1999 or so.

Its basically what it says on the tin.

The quality visually is not the best but its fascinating viewing.

Only half way through (stopped a few days ago for xmas) but contributions from Kinnock, Corbyn, Benn, Foot, Healey and numerous Blairites who were in power at the time.

Very sorry for Michael Foot a decent man clearly, but utterly out of his depth and very sad watching ep 2 which focuses on Thatcher smashing him, he just was not the man for that era .

Lowlights of it,, a tory saying they cut back on spending last few days as it was done and dusted and labour people laughing when Foot floated positions for him if he got power. The idea of him winning even in Labour was never entertained.

The battle between Benn and Healey also gripping stuff.

I'd recommend it..that guy has uploaded all 4 parts on his channel.

Irish Praetorian

Irish Praetorian wrote: »

Bear in mind there are going from 55-59 year olds to 60-64 over the next five years than there will be 15-19 year olds going to 20-24. Young people might be more liberal but they make up a shrinking proportion of the UK and most Western states.

With the exception of those whose parents were born outside of Europe, their numbers are rapidly rising.

stefanovich

AllForIt wrote: »

They did. That's why they voted for an Islamophobic, homophobic, racist narcissist as their PM.

Misusing and overusing those terms really lessens their impact.

Leroy42

stefanovich wrote: »

Misusing and overusing those terms really lessens their impact.

One could say the same about Leftist, Marxist or socialist or communist.

Yet here we are.

Joe_ Public

[Deleted User] wrote: »

With the exception of those whose parents were born outside of Europe, their numbers are rapidly rising.

Out of curiosity, what figures would this be based on? Any recent studies i see say there is a declining birth rate among the UK's white population. The numbers of younger people remain constant because there is a higher birth rate among migrants and minority communities. In some regions of the UK, up to one third of the local population is 65+ years of age. The Scots say they will face a manpower shortage crisis if freedom of movement goes etc.

This is just a global trend really, young people flocking to the cities which grow more liberal and diverse while the regions travel the opposite direction. I see no reason, particularly with brexit, why this will change anytime soon.

Irish Praetorian

stefanovich wrote: »

Misusing and overusing those terms really lessens their impact.

Leroy42 wrote: »

One could say the same about Leftist, Marxist or socialist or communist.

Yet here we are.

Perhaps some might even be so adventurous to suggest that its a problem that impacts both sides of the political spectrum?

I dislike the idea of Europe getting even more infected by this trite American style back and forth of greater and greater hyperbole. I swear all one sees over there is 'racist homophobes' doing battle with 'Venezuelan socialists', it's childish and beneath us.