Keir Starmer

[Jairzinho]

I don't think he could win or lose it now. Elections increasingly appear to be about what happens in the last few weeks before them (due to aforementioned role of media). It's not something that reflects particularly well on the electorate.

 

 

[Gnasher]

A whopping 82% voted Labour in 2019.

 

I'll probably be shot down again for this but as Labour are the party that actually built the fucking thing shouldn't eyebrows be raised?

 

"Two in five healthcare workers vote Conservative in local elections" https://nursingnotes.co.uk/news/politics/two-in-five-healthcare-workers-vote-conservative-in-local-elections/

[Section_31]

32 minutes ago, Gnasher said:

A whopping 82% voted Labour in 2019.

 

I'll probably be shot down again for this but as Labour are the party that actually built the fucking thing shouldn't eyebrows be raised?

 

"Two in five healthcare workers vote Conservative in local elections" https://nursingnotes.co.uk/news/politics/two-in-five-healthcare-workers-vote-conservative-in-local-elections/

 

One nurse justified her decision on the survey; “The Government’s top priority must be to fix the economy and boost employment. I (reluctantly) voted for my local Conservative candidate as I know they will do what needs to be done to do this.”

 

 

Yes, it's local councillors who control NHS funding, I'd forgotten about that.

[skend04]

35 minutes ago, Gnasher said:

A whopping 82% voted Labour in 2019.

 

I'll probably be shot down again for this but as Labour are the party that actually built the fucking thing shouldn't eyebrows be raised?

 

"Two in five healthcare workers vote Conservative in local elections" https://nursingnotes.co.uk/news/politics/two-in-five-healthcare-workers-vote-conservative-in-local-elections/

Anything more recent?

 

That's a year old.

[Numero Veinticinco]

59 minutes ago, Jairzinho said:

I don't think he could win or lose it now. Elections increasingly appear to be about what happens in the last few weeks before them (due to aforementioned role of media). It's not something that reflects particularly well on the electorate.

 

 

If he can’t lose it now, he can do a lot of damage. I agree about what you do in the last part of the campaign is going to be what makes it breaks it, but I think you can really put people off to the point it doesn’t matter what else you do. Unless there’s something like Brexit to sway things, that is. 

[Numero Veinticinco]

1 hour ago, Gnasher said:

Excellent. I find the English Labour Party's unwillingness to look and learn from the success of other left wing political parties frustrating.

This seems entirely made up. 
 

 

[Gnasher]

1 minute ago, Section_31 said:

 

One nurse justified her decision on the survey; “The Government’s top priority must be to fix the economy and boost employment. I (reluctantly) voted for my local Conservative candidate as I know they will do what needs to be done to do this.”

 

 

Yes, it's local councillors who control NHS funding, I'd forgotten about that.

I'm not sure where they find these these people for these surveys or snap interviews. Do they disregard certain points of veiw to print the more controversial? A sort of click bait? I don't know, maybe I'm naive but they don't half find some idiots.

[Section_31]

1 minute ago, Gnasher said:

I'm not sure where they find these these people for these surveys or snap interviews. Do they disregard certain points of veiw to print the more controversial? A sort of click bait? I don't know, maybe I'm naive but they don't half find some idiots.

If there is a general move towards the Tories in NHS staff I'd suggest it could be for two reasons. 

 

A few of them do private practice (I bet most GPs do regular private work now, for all their moaning about there not being enough hours in the day) so they're not particularly arsed about the NHS as an institution as much as the likes of the Daily Mirror are. 

 

But also the way they've been encouraged over time to feel about ordinary punters.

 

In my experience, especially in A&E, a lot of health staff treat you like they're doing you a favour because it's 'free' (even though you've paid for it).

 

The general assumption if you turn up to A&E is that you're scum, taking up valuable time and should be lucky to get what you're given.

 

As we've started to despise the poor over time in this country, somehow that's wormed it's way into the NHS too. I've seen it to an extent with GPs too if anyone I know has been asking for sick notes or any kind of support for towards claiming benefits. 

 

The NHS has been morally/spirituality broken over time, not just physically. You'll find more compassion in a Soviet Stalag.

 

The idea that the NHS is a precious national institution is baffling to me, it's not fit for purpose (as a direct result of the Tories and the great British electorate). If I put me foot through a window, my first though wouldn't be that I'd hurt myself, but that I'd have to park my arse in some third world shithole for the next 18 hours.

 

[Gnasher]

6 minutes ago, Section_31 said:

If there is a general move towards the Tories in NHS staff I'd suggest it could be for two reasons. 

 

A few of them do private practice (I bet most GPs do regular private work now, for all their moaning about there not being enough hours in the day) so they're not particularly arsed about the NHS as an institution as much as the likes of the Daily Mirror are. 

 

But also the way they've been encouraged over time to feel about ordinary punters.

 

In my experience, especially in A&E, a lot of health staff treat you like they're doing you a favour because it's 'free' (even though you've paid for it).

 

The general assumption if you turn up to A&E is that you're scum, taking up valuable time and should be lucky to get what you're given.

 

As we've started to despise the poor over time in this country, somehow that's wormed it's way into the NHS too. I've seen it to an extent with GPs too if anyone I know has been asking for sick notes or any kind of support for towards claiming benefits. 

 

The NHS has been morally/spirituality broken over time, not just physically. You'll find more compassion in a Soviet Stalag.

 

The idea that the NHS is a precious national institution is baffling to me, it's not fit for purpose (as a direct result of the Tories and the great British electorate). If I put me foot through a window, my first though wouldn't be that I'd hurt myself, but that I'd have to park my arse in some third world shithole for the next 18 hours.

 

Yep. Quite depressing when you look at it that way. 

[Vincent Vega]

This is class from Mick Lynch.

 

[Gnasher]

1 minute ago, Vincent Vega said:

This is class from Mick Lynch.

 

Desperately needs his own thread.

[Gnasher]

1 hour ago, skend04 said:

Anything more recent?

 

That's a year old.

So? Time limits on here now ?

 

Anything to say on the subject?  If so keep it to yourself.

[Numero Veinticinco]

13 minutes ago, Vincent Vega said:

This is class from Mick Lynch.

 

Haha. Excellent. 

[Jack the Sipper]

16 minutes ago, Gnasher said:

So? Time limits on here now ?

 

Anything to say on the subject? 

 

Well, apart from the fact it's over a year old, and doesn't take into account anything that's happened in the political or social arenas, or the NHS for that matter, in that period, the article (and you) comparing a poll taken for a general election with one taken for local elections, it doesn't present its methodology for either poll (which might give some idea how representative they are), and the poll you posted is only one poll. Polls are only worth anything when (leaving aside what I've already said about them being representative, recent, comparing like for like) they are seen in the context of other polls which form part of a trend.

 

There may well be a move towards nurses voting Tories at general elections right now and in the future, but that poll doesn't show that.

[Bjornebye]

19 minutes ago, Vincent Vega said:

This is class from Mick Lynch.

 

Hahahahaha

[Gnasher]

5 minutes ago, Jack the Sipper said:

 

Well, apart from the fact it's over a year old, and doesn't take into account anything that's happened in the political or social arenas, or the NHS for that matter, in that period, the article (and you) comparing a poll taken for a general election with one taken for local elections, it doesn't present its methodology for either poll (which might give some idea how representative they are), and the poll you posted is only one poll. Polls are only worth anything when (leaving aside what I've already said about them being representative, recent, comparing like for like) they are seen in the context of other polls which form part of a trend.

 

There may well be a move towards nurses voting Tories at general elections right now and in the future, but that poll doesn't show that.

 

I hope you're right. 

[Gnasher]

4 minutes ago, Bjornebye said:

Hahahahaha

Get the thread going, the man deserves it 

[Numero Veinticinco]

6 minutes ago, Jack the Sipper said:

 

Well, apart from the fact it's over a year old, and doesn't take into account anything that's happened in the political or social arenas, or the NHS for that matter, in that period, the article (and you) comparing a poll taken for a general election with one taken for local elections, it doesn't present its methodology for either poll (which might give some idea how representative they are), and the poll you posted is only one poll. Polls are only worth anything when (leaving aside what I've already said about them being representative, recent, comparing like for like) they are seen in the context of other polls which form part of a trend.

 

There may well be a move towards nurses voting Tories at general elections right now and in the future, but that poll doesn't show that.

Yes, but if you just look at the headline, and make a judgement off of that, you can make it look as if everybody hates Labour because of Starmer and that they all want Corbyn back so Corbyn can ride a left-wing agenda all the way to an election win, just like Wales. 

[Gnasher]

5 minutes ago, Numero Veinticinco said:

Yes, but if you just look at the headline, and make a judgement off of that, you can make it look as if everybody hates Labour because of Starmer and that they all want Corbyn back so Corbyn can ride a left-wing agenda all the way to an election win, just like Wales. 

 

 No if you look the poll you might be concerned that Nurses support for the  Labour Party is (for whatever reasin) eroding.

 

Another shoot the messenger defence, this time negative data shouldn't be shown because its a bit old?

 

 

"How Labour Lost the Nurses" https://tribunemag.co.uk/2021/05/how-labour-lost-the-nurses

 

 

Unfortunately I wouldn't be at all suprised if the polling and the article contains an element of truth.

 

 

[Numero Veinticinco]

5 minutes ago, Gnasher said:

 

 No if you look the poll you might be concerned that Nurses support for the  Labour Party is (for whatever reasin) eroding.

 

Another shoot the messenger defence, this time negative data shouldn't be shown because its a bit old?

 

 

"How Labour Lost the Nurses" https://tribunemag.co.uk/2021/05/how-labour-lost-the-nurses

 

 

Unfortunately I wouldn't be at all suprised if the polling and the article contains an element of truth.

 

 

You just didn’t take in JtS’s response did you. Nobody has attacked the messenger, they’ve questioned the relevance of the data contained in the message to the outcome being proposed. Always with this ‘shoot the messenger’ bullshit. If you take the upcoming by-election win for Labour, a swing from Tory to Labour, as proof of a landslide win at the next election, you’ll be sorely disappointed come election time. Labour will paint it that way and they’ll be wrong too. Its not about shooting the messenger, it’s about a consistent and accurate extrapolation of data. 

[Gnasher]

19 minutes ago, Numero Veinticinco said:

You just didn’t take in JtS’s response did you. Nobody has attacked the messenger, they’ve questioned the relevance of the data contained in the message to the outcome being proposed. Always with this ‘shoot the messenger’ bullshit. If you take the upcoming by-election win for Labour, a swing from Tory to Labour, as proof of a landslide win at the next election, you’ll be sorely disappointed come election time. Labour will paint it that way and they’ll be wrong too. Its not about shooting the messenger, it’s about a consistent and accurate extrapolation of data. 

I did take in his post actually and to be honest I found his dismissal of the data a bit optimistic. Imo the difference in numbers in two years too great to dismiss, the fall in numbers too steep.  As I said I hope he's right and it can be waved away as a rogue poll because its a shocking read from a few years ago. The Tory jump from 6% to 42% is to big to ignore.

 

 

https://metro.co.uk/2019/12/12/vast-majority-nurses-planning-vote-labour-11807056/amp/

 

 

[Numero Veinticinco]

7 minutes ago, Gnasher said:

I did take in his post actually and to be honest I found his dismissal of the data a bit optimistic. Imo the difference in numbers in two years too great to dismiss, the fall in numbers too steep.  As I said I hope he's right and it can be waved away as a rogue poll because its a shocking read.

You should read it again, because what he is saying isn’t that the data should be dismissed, it’s that a year old local elections poll with absolutely no detailing of the methodology cannot be used to accurately predict general election numbers, and that judging one set of data from general then judging it on slides down to figures at a local election level is just not something you can do and draw accurate conclusions from. They’re just different things, and that’s in the best case scenario where the local election figures, taken from 1800 people (I think the article said, I’m too lazy to go back and look) are accurate. As we can’t see methodology, which could be absolutely crazy bonkers, it’s hard to tell if it’s even as good as just unreliable. 
 

Either way, it’s not shooting the messenger (which would be ‘pah, fuck that pollster/paper/blog/journo, you can’t believe anything they say so I’m not going to look at it’), it’s actually questioning if the content is reliable. 

[Gnasher]

6 minutes ago, Numero Veinticinco said:

You should read it again, because what he is saying isn’t that the data should be dismissed, it’s that a year old local elections poll with absolutely no detailing of the methodology cannot be used to accurately predict general election numbers, and that judging one set of data from general then judging it on slides down to figures at a local election level is just not something you can do and draw accurate conclusions from. They’re just different things, and that’s in the best case scenario where the local election figures, taken from 1800 people (I think the article said, I’m too lazy to go back and look) are accurate. As we can’t see methodology, which could be absolutely crazy bonkers, it’s hard to tell if it’s even as good as just unreliable. 
 

Either way, it’s not shooting the messenger (which would be ‘pah, fuck that pollster/paper/blog/journo, you can’t believe anything they say so I’m not going to look at it’), it’s actually questioning if the content is reliable. 

 

I agree with him/you the data can't be set in stone, a lot of unanswered questions there. However the data we have and imo the jump is to large for it not to ring alarm bells.

[Jack the Sipper]

21 minutes ago, Gnasher said:

I did take in his post actually and to be honest I found his dismissal of the data a bit optimistic. Imo the difference in numbers in two years too great to dismiss, the fall in numbers too steep.  As I said I hope he's right and it can be waved away as a rogue poll because its a shocking read.

 

It's not so much that it's a rogue poll (although it might be with nothing contemporaneous presented to compare with), its's more that the article and you are comparing two polls, one asking about intentions in a GE, with one asking about intentions during LEs, to show a move away from Labour. You also don't take into account the validity of the poll given they don't present their methodology. Any poll can give any answer if you ask the right people the right questions. And you don't take into account the fact that even the latter poll is over a year old, and how redundant this might make the poll, given how a week is a long time in politics.

 

One thing I will say for that article is the quote (assuming this isn't made up) from the nurse who talks about the Tories being the party of the economy. I don't believe they are, but it's a strong and enduring perception, and one that has always got them votes whatever else they might be seen to be failing at. 

 

One thing Tories for generations have realised, is that, outside of a noisy minority of tribalists and ideologues on either side of the political debate, the mass of people in British society care as little for the plight of the Palestinians as they do for Tommy Robinsons right to free speech. What they care about, and what decides their vote at elections, is how any politician/potential government is going to improve their lives in some way - who is going to look after the economy in such a way that puts more money in their pockets and gives them/keeps them in a job. Who is going to best secure theirs and their family's futures and give them some joy in their lives. Bread and circuses, as Juvenale put it 1900 years ago.

 

It's a powerful weapon to have in your amoury, even if it's not earned, and their opponents would do well to acknowledge and combat that if they're really interested in kicking this shower out of power.

[Numero Veinticinco]

7 minutes ago, Gnasher said:

 

I agree with him/you the data can't be set in stone, a lot of unanswered questions there. However the data we have and imo the jump is to large for it not to ring alarm bells.

It's what's it is jumping from and too that is misleading and it seems to be something you're missing. Jumping from general election results across to the local election from who knows where and how. You say there's a jump from 6% to 42%, but there isn't. If you think they can be compared in any way, fair enough. I don't. Especially without knowing how they did the survey.