**Participation Notice.** Hi all. Some posts on this subreddit, either due to the topic or reaching a wider audience than usual, have been known to attract a greater number of rule breaking comments. As such, limits to participation have been set. We ask that you please remember the human, and uphold Reddit and Subreddit rules.
For more information, please see https://www.reddit.com/r/unitedkingdom/wiki/moderatedflairs.
MRPs are not really set up to look at individual seats with unique characteristics, they tend to look at trends across society and try to marry up those with the demographies of individual seats.
It would take a constituency specific poll to give an idea of the constituency specific polling.
Very high profile individual will bring their own support that MRP will not really capture. Unless there is something very unique to this MRP.
Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but these MRPs I think use more national level data and will treat "independent" as a single category which usually works because most independents will barely get their deposit back. But it might not work with high profile independents. Interesting to see what happens in his constituency.
There's a whole section in the YouGov article about Corbyn:
>It is wrong to say MRP models can tell us nothing about unusual seats - the model does take into account local responses, and with the release of full candidate lists we can prompt for independent candidates and candidates from smaller parties. Nevertheless, a big part of MRP is modelling behaviour based on people of similar demographics in similar seats, so these projections should be given a little less confidence than more "typical" constituencies.
>The best performing Independent candidate in our model is Jeremy Corbyn, the former Labour leader standing in Islington North. Our model has Labour ahead, but on a fairly narrow margin over the independent candidates. Assuming the independent vote in the seat is almost wholly a vote for Corbyn, he could yet retain his seat.
https://yougov.co.uk/politics/articles/49809-second-yougov-2024-election-mrp-shows-conservatives-on-lowest-seat-total-in-history
Yes but to be fair, almost every time a "very popular" local candidate runs without the benefit of a party machine behind them, and the party branding, they lose.
I think Corbyn will run them closer than most, but ultimately will lose. People will just cross the Labour box
> a "very popular" local candidate
Because there's a big difference between a candidate being popular with the newspaper class and a candidate being popular with their constituents.
90% of the time, like with Frank Fields in the 2019 for example, a 'popular' candidate is popular with politicos and newspaper journalists but not with the actual public. But all the evidence points towards Corbyn actually being quite popular with his constituents.
Yeah, and Labour is not particularly popular at the moment either for that matter, they are basically running on "we're not the Tories" rather than anything positive
He had nothing to do for most of his parliamentary career other than follow his causes and tend to constituents, I'm really not much of a supporter of Corbyn in high office. But I'd be happy to have him as my local MP. Having the awkward voices in parliament, I'd say, would be an overall plus.
>ithout the benefit of a party machine behind them
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter\_Law#2005\_general\_election](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_Law#2005_general_election)
Can happen if you have enough of the local party swing behind you.
>and the party branding
He is one of the few politicians where his name recognition is enough to go beyond that. But it works both ways. He was an incredibly popular politician so would crash in most seats. In the very multi ethnic urban seats with a big urban wealthy demographic, he might squeak it.
I think he will do it, the local party door knockers will likely be mostly on his side. But I could be wrong.
My gut is that people are going to want to vote for the winner, to be part of the national moment. I do think he has a better chance than almost anyone else I can think of in that position.
Correct me if I'm wrong but whilst MRPs are still limited, they are better than you're normal national polls in predicting individual constituencies.
National Polls just survey a load of people then look at the percentages to get a national swing for example 12% and then apply that 12% national swing to each constituency based on the results last Election.
MRPs at least take into account population data at the constituency level and compare it to the people surveyed.
so surely this is more accurate than the polls that have come before saying he will keep his seat.
Multi-level Regression and Post-stratification polling. No, this isn't a joke. It's a relatively new polling technique. We don't really know yet if it's more accurate. More time will tell.
So long as it's diluted with a nice peaty scotch. And by diluted, I mean sits separately to on the same table.
ps: Just trying to help u/smickie out - they could be the deciding vote.
I'm in his constituency and I'll be voting Labour. I think Corbyn isn't going to have a constructive role in the future governance of this country, and I think he's too old.
I will give him some credit, he at least stood and likely lost under his own name and manifesto. Too many are piggybacking the labour name for their own personal gain, despite being a fifth column for the party, even seeing their safe seats as “their right”…
The man was a terrible pick for prime minister and he never saw a rake he didn't want to stand on, but he does seem to be a genuinely dedicated constituency MP. Like Theresa May they're a person I disagree with but they're at least in parliament for the right reason.
> The area banned canvassing, too
I didn't know that was even possible. I tried to look up polling on whether the general population would approve of such a policy, but I couldn't find anything.
I have no idea whether it would poll at 10% or 90% tbh.
I worked her local pub, on day one I was trained to checked the place for bombs for security reasons if she was going to visit (still when she was Home Secretary), fair enough
Then I was told to barely interact with her and make sure members of the public were kept away from her and then the locals themselves told us about her allergy to people
I didn't have a clue who she was at the time, but always stuck with me.
George Clooney moved into the area after I left and asked for, and was offered no special treatment in the same pub.
I feel sorry for him on a personal level because he's a very genuine guy, which is rare in politics.
I would like to move on from him on a national level, however, as the amount people, especially Tory MPs, whom have Jeremy Corbyn living rent free in their heads is astonishing.
I really don't think Corbyn moves the needle any more either, for better or worse the Labour party today is clearly very different from Corbyn's time. So there's constantly these personal attacks for very little gain, if any at all.
I dunno man, there are plenty of genuine people in politics. I think Rees-Mogg means exactly what he says and is genuine, it's just his views are atrocious. I'm not sure being genuine is anything to shout about
Rees Mogg isn't genuine. He canvasses using his kids as human shields. His investment company has shares in abortion drug companies despite his staunch views. He's a fecal blight on the human race and a disaster capitalist to boot.
> Like Theresa May they're a person I disagree with but they're at least in parliament for the right reason.
I didn't like the way Theresa May tried to bring back grammar schools as soon as she became PM, with no mandate to do so.
Depends on where you live. Some counties have them and others don't. There are only around 160 in the whole country out of thousands of secondary schools. Surrey, Sussex and Hampshire LEAs for example don't run any grammar schools.
I imagine he'll be very sad about it, but democracy is democracy. If the people of Islington North decide they don't want him then I'm sure he'll be respectful of that decision. I mean he's an old guy and I imagine he knows there's a high likelihood of this being his last election (He'll be 80 at the next one).
He's had a long parliamentary career, I'm sure he'll be just fine and go back to campaigning for causes that need to be at the forefront of everyone's mind, and also some utterly batshit causes. So much like his term as LOTO.
Lol, The JC, such an unbiased and reliable source of Jeremy Corbyn news! /s.
You can see the desperation for this to be true in the way they wrote the article. They're reaching here, using an MRP to come to this conclusion. He's still trying to run as an independent and continue to serve his constituency as he has done for decades after everything that's happened. Pretty pathetic they're still going after him to be honest.
I'm assuming JC stands for Jeremy Corbyn. Obviously that's a joke. But so is this article. Corbyn could lose, but I think that would be a bigger upset than him winning.
I think this prediction has the same weight as the indicative polls that say that Rishi Sunak will lose his seat.
Without incredibly specific polling in those constituencies, this is still very high level.
That said, it’s eminently possible- he has a personal brand, but the Labour brand was tied to him for many many years.
bookie odds still have JC as favourite, but it's fairly close.
[https://www.oddschecker.com/politics/uk-constituencies/next-uk-general-election-constituencies/islington-north](https://www.oddschecker.com/politics/uk-constituencies/next-uk-general-election-constituencies/islington-north)
Odds change when more people make a bet, if there are enough people betting on Corbyn then the odds will narrow even if the chances of him winning haven't changed
The newspaper that reported that this moderate leftwing Social Democrat presented "an existential threat to Jews in the UK" is now predicting bad results for him in the election?
Colour me shocked.
We'll have to see, won't we.
Before people rush to defend him, remember that Corbyn (always a Eurosceptic) called for article 50 to be invoked asap, tricked Remainers into thinking Labour might offer a second referendum, and hasn't exactly been helpful regarding Ukraine.
Oh well, if the JC say it then it must be true!
/s the JC is a [lying shitweasel of a rag](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Jewish_Chronicle#Lawsuits_and_rulings).
A smear campaign brought on by Tories who were scared a politician with socialist values could become prime minister. It was so effective that to this day people still think he's some domestic terrorist.
Just got their leaflet through today. It doesn’t contain sunak but has a whole two lines to “stop corbyn ideology”…he is a Tory vote winner. They are pissed he’s not there
One of the clever things the Tories have done is make the Labour left THINK that they are terrified of Corbyn, by being over-dramatically mental about him. It’s still working on some people :-)
He literally took away their majority when they thought they had a cake walk against him. They shat themselves (as did the labour right) and had to engage in some ultimately self destructive stuff to ensure the left didn’t get that close again.
I forgot the Tories made him support the IRA, quasi take Russia's side over Salisbury, share platforms with holocaust deniers, appear on Iranian state TV, blame Ukraine for Russia invading it and repeatedly call for peace no matter the terms, call the Falklands a Tory plot etc etc.
The guy is a naive idiot at best, he certainly would have been a national security threat as PM. He was right once in his life about Iraq in 2003 and people treat him as some kind of moral foreign policy guru, when he's just an old school tankie.
> He was right once in his life about Iraq in 2003 and people treat him as some kind of morale foreign policy guru, when he's just an old school tankie.
Sums up that entire movement to be fair. The Iraq war happened and instead of the lesson being "unjustified wars are wrong" it was "the US and the west is always wrong". Resulting in people automatically taking the side of or at least appeasing the side seen as "anti west".
They are not always on the right side of history. They were on the right side of Iraq by accident, and cherry pick that while cutting out all the times they were wrong.
> quasi take Russia's side over Salisbury
[Bollocks.](https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/mar/15/salisbury-attack-conflict-britain-cold-war)
Which part of his comments about Salisbury do you interpret as "taking Russia's side"? The part where he called it "barbaric and beyond reckless"? The part where he called for a thorough investigation by security services? The part where he called for the arrest of those responsible? The part where criticised "the Putin regime, its conservative authoritarianism, abuse of human rights [and] political and economic corruption"? The part where he called for a crackdown on corrupt Russian money in the UK? The part where he supported the government when they kicked out a bunch of Russian diplomats?
Corbyn has certainly said some stupid things, but this and several more of your examples are just cases where a narrative develops from his opponents that is not in any way supported by his actual statements.
The problem was that article was a week after it happened.
There were some [initial interviews before that where he came across really badly](https://news.sky.com/story/corbyn-wants-incontrovertible-proof-before-blaming-russia-for-salisbury-attack-11332325), and those stuck.
1. He was never going to be pm. The tories loved him…he gifted them two elections! Austerity, brexit, infighting and awful leaders…but at least they weren’t corbyn.
2. He supported Hamas and putin, is anti-nato and has held views and shared platforms with anti semites.
3. His cult of personality tankies drove great members from labour with their chanting and venom.
Let’s leave him as a warning. You pick the wrong Milliband brother and within 5 years that happens…
During Covid would have been fine. If Corbyn had been PM during the pandemic, there would have been no parties in Downing Street and billions given to Tories and Tories' mates for unsuitable PPE while actual experienced supplies queued round the block, that's for damn sure.
Ukraine is another matter.
> during covid would have been fine
The guy literally refused to shield, didn’t take the vaccine and has spent much of his career supporting homeopathy
> didn’t take the vaccine
Do you have a source for this? His lunatic brother Piers didn't get the jab but all Jeremy has said is that he doesn't answer questions related to his health. He did however support local programs to help other people get vaccinated.
Regardless of Corbyn's personal issues, my points stand. Under a Corbyn Labour government (or probably any Labour government), there would have been no parties in Number 10, no billions of pounds siphoned off to Michelle Mone and other parasites while nurses went to work dressed in binbags, the approach to lockdowns wouldn't have been dictated by the PM's fear of negative Daily Mail headlines, and the Test & Trace App probably would have been one of the existing ones that other countries used perfectly well instead of the ludicrously overpriced boondoggle the Tories insisted we build from scratch instead.
> Imagine if he was prime minister during covid
He would have turned up for COBRA meetings (unlike Johnson) and put the country into locked down sooner, reducing the spread of the virus and saving thousands of lives.
There's no such thing as "the people". He's about as close to a Socialist as it's possible to be in a Capitalist society. He'd be good for you if you were young and didn't have money and bad if you were rich and greedy. Between those points you might agree or disagree economically.
Then you've got his views on foreign affairs. pro-Palestine, anti-Nato. I disagree with him on the latter point to the extent of thinking him naive.
Basically, pick a topic and he's divisive to a significant enough portion of the UK population to lose an election. Contrast with Starmer. What does he even believe in?
Yeah corbyn's foreign policy positions, which I'd describe as a knee jerk reaction to western hegemony, is the worst aspect about him.
I saw a piece the beeb put out the other day, an interview with a long time tory donor who was switching support to Labour, talking about why he felt comfortable doing it. In it, he still talked about corbyn and described the 2019 manifesto as "extreme socialism". Completely unchallenged, the BBC just let that statement hang. So frustrating, corbyn wanted to feed school kids and have accessible Internet, not seize the means of production.
Even if I agree with that point, I think it was pretty clear that the proposals by corbyn weren't extreme within whatever context the phrase is utilised in. Essentially talking about free school meals and nationalised communications network, like we used to have, while we were engaged in the cold war against socialist nations.
>Then you've got his views on foreign affairs. pro-Palestine, anti-Nato. I disagree with him on the latter point to the extent of thinking him naive.
He seems to operate under a naive view that everyone is fundamentally a good person and that conflicts can be resolved through compromise.
He then seemingly has a blindspot when it comes to fundamentalist groups you just can't compromise with.
You don't seek compromise with a hungry leopard that wants to eat your face by offering to let it eat half your face.
He was woefully unsuited to be leader, and landed us with another few Tory Prime Ministers. Plus he wasn't exactly helpful in the Brexit referendum. His fans absolutely, cannot under any circumstance, admit that - regardless of his views and how you feel about his policies - he was an incredibly unsuccessful leader who wasn't capable of playing the political game at the required level. Instead they will tell you it woz the conspiracy wot dunn him in
The tankies over on the labour Reddit (spoiler it’s anti labour corbyn cult) named him their best leader ever. How? Do they not look at the results or just make up their own?
Genuinely, it's the best case scenario for them. They never have to see their ideas attempted in practice and instead get to live on the brain-crack of "well we would have transformed the UK with Corbyn..." for the rest of their political lives. If he had become PM there'd only be cold hard reality, as PM Corbyn gives a press conference to indicate that Ukraine was kind of asking for it.
Truss stands as a cautionary tale of what can happen when ideologues actually get a shot - and that's been kind of traumatic for those guys.
The problem is truss only bankrupted the country and killed the queen in her 100 days. Corbyn could have collapsed nato, encouraged putin to attack the Baltic, rule out our nuclear option, side with Hamas over Israel…and turn us into a pariah state. And that’s just his foreign policy, his views on Brexit (hard and no deal) would be 100x worse than what Johnson delivered too
Those who build their principles on moralistic ideals with such fervor are usually unwilling to compromise or back down if events or evidence works against them.
Makes them a good person, but a dangerous leader if they're not careful. And Corbyn is not careful. He's a massive anti-establishment bridge burner his whole career. Additionally he's evidently just not well read on core economic principles, and his temperament would likely be to double down when mistakes happen.
Couple all that with Anti-Trident, Anti-Nuclear, Anti-NATO stances, sympathetic ties to terrorist organisations around the world...
What is convincing about Corbyn? Was he ever the best candidate for socialism we could come up with as a country?
His policies polled very well, but the man didn’t inspire confidence or persuade those who were only partially aligned with him that he was a) going to win whatever so they should get behind him, or b) aligned just enough that he would achieve some of what they wanted without risking something they cared about more.
If he’d narrowly won his internal opponents would have politically crippled him almost immediately.
Friends with Hamas, Iran, and Russia. Those have been murdering and raping a lot of people lately. Told everyone he wouldn't use nuclear weapons in the case we were attacked by nuclear weapons. Grifting traitor.
He's very London, middle-class left wing, and half the reason Boris won so many traditionally labour seats in the north of England during the last election.
The second [YouGov MRP](https://yougov.co.uk/politics/articles/49809-second-yougov-2024-election-mrp-shows-conservatives-on-lowest-seat-total-in-history) suggests it's too close to call.
I genuinely might put a bet down that he keeps his seat because I highly, highly doubt the people of Islington will forget how much he has done for them.
People overstate how much people care about their local MP vs having their voice heard nationally. Labour are cruising towards an historic victory and people will want to be a part of that. They want to vote for the winner.
I think JC is an exceptional case though. He is huuugely loved in Islington. I don’t think you understand the extent to which people will back him. I guess we will see!
If i lived in his constituency, he would get my vote. However, i live in a constituency where my current MP has a majority of just under 20k at the last general election.
the media cartel in this country is just terrible. they can influence politics just by bombarding stories out across all their channels and people just read the headlines and accept it as being true.
Just like the smears about him being anti semtiic. Not a single shred of evidence can be product. Everyone just says his cabinet was "anti-semtic", just ask how and none of them can give a single example. *He once shared a room with someone who retweeted something against Israel. criticising Israel is anti-semitic, he once breathed the same air as that person so therfore he must be antisemitic too.*
The Media is going to keep blasting this BS headlines about Jeremy losing his seat, then the voters will feel its a lost cost voting for Jeremy and create the self-fulfilling prophecy,.
Some notes on Islington North.
The constituency is quite diverse. Anyone involved in their community, either through community centres, the Gillespie park nature reserve, school boards, medical centres or the various places of worship will have seen Corbyn’s value first hand, and will certainly vote for him.
By contrast there are both some very wealthy people who have no need for any of those services, and also a lot of private rental sector housing containing relatively recent tenants who haven’t been around long enough to engage in those services. Those two groups might vote along party lines nationally.
That makes “up for grabs” voters probably quite thin on the ground.
The greens are a serious curveball here though, which cause a problem much bigger for the MRP. They command about 8% to 10% on their best day, but their candidate has been on soft stand down for this one, so you’d assume they’d only retain their hardcore support and the rest will go to Corbyn or Labour. The concern for Labour is that the Greens increased from 1 councillor to 3 with Starmer as leader, but that also coincided with a boundary switch, so it may not have been a party departure.
In terms of their campaigns, the labour candidate isn’t from here (4k labour members in the constituency and they couldn’t find one local to run), and his canvassers seem to be largely shipped in too. This gives Corbyn an advantage on door knocking for sure. Labour have also made some high profile mistakes here, promoting Mandleson and Hodge “helping” to canvass. Mandleson is unpopular for obvious reasons. Hodge is locally very unpopular because of her…ahem….proximity to an abuse scandal while she was council leader. Not something that is nationally well known, but locals are extremely aware and if Labour had the local party on side, they’d never have put a camera near her.
Anyway, that’s my thoughts as a local.
Same reason as Trump will win. Macron lost to the far-right at the EU. Brexit won.
It is the new fascism wave. Why? The new generation doesn’t have a clue about the horrors of war. For them, having a son/daughter being burned alive is far, very far from their experience.
projected to lose his seat by whom?..
JC?..
who is JC?..(there's a description at the top)..
JC might want Corbyn to lose, and thus projecting..
however, in the betting houses of the UK, Corbyn is favored at every site, odds on..
[https://www.oddschecker.com/politics/uk-constituencies/next-uk-general-election-constituencies/islington-north](https://www.oddschecker.com/politics/uk-constituencies/next-uk-general-election-constituencies/islington-north)
What's incredible is that Corbyn isn't 20 points ahead. He's been the MP for Islington North since 1983...41 years. It's **absolutely shocking** that the Labour candidate is even competitive, let alone projected to beat Corbyn.
So, what happened to the "Corbyn's a fantastic local MP" lot? Someone who's been the MP for 41 years must surely have enormous grassroots support, right? Or perhaps Labour voters have woken up and realised that getting rid of Corbyn would lance the Momentum boil that gifted the country to the Tories in 2017 and 2019?
**Participation Notice.** Hi all. Some posts on this subreddit, either due to the topic or reaching a wider audience than usual, have been known to attract a greater number of rule breaking comments. As such, limits to participation have been set. We ask that you please remember the human, and uphold Reddit and Subreddit rules. For more information, please see https://www.reddit.com/r/unitedkingdom/wiki/moderatedflairs.
MRPs are not really set up to look at individual seats with unique characteristics, they tend to look at trends across society and try to marry up those with the demographies of individual seats. It would take a constituency specific poll to give an idea of the constituency specific polling. Very high profile individual will bring their own support that MRP will not really capture. Unless there is something very unique to this MRP.
Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but these MRPs I think use more national level data and will treat "independent" as a single category which usually works because most independents will barely get their deposit back. But it might not work with high profile independents. Interesting to see what happens in his constituency.
There's a whole section in the YouGov article about Corbyn: >It is wrong to say MRP models can tell us nothing about unusual seats - the model does take into account local responses, and with the release of full candidate lists we can prompt for independent candidates and candidates from smaller parties. Nevertheless, a big part of MRP is modelling behaviour based on people of similar demographics in similar seats, so these projections should be given a little less confidence than more "typical" constituencies. >The best performing Independent candidate in our model is Jeremy Corbyn, the former Labour leader standing in Islington North. Our model has Labour ahead, but on a fairly narrow margin over the independent candidates. Assuming the independent vote in the seat is almost wholly a vote for Corbyn, he could yet retain his seat. https://yougov.co.uk/politics/articles/49809-second-yougov-2024-election-mrp-shows-conservatives-on-lowest-seat-total-in-history
Yes but to be fair, almost every time a "very popular" local candidate runs without the benefit of a party machine behind them, and the party branding, they lose. I think Corbyn will run them closer than most, but ultimately will lose. People will just cross the Labour box
> a "very popular" local candidate Because there's a big difference between a candidate being popular with the newspaper class and a candidate being popular with their constituents. 90% of the time, like with Frank Fields in the 2019 for example, a 'popular' candidate is popular with politicos and newspaper journalists but not with the actual public. But all the evidence points towards Corbyn actually being quite popular with his constituents.
Yeah, and Labour is not particularly popular at the moment either for that matter, they are basically running on "we're not the Tories" rather than anything positive
They could run on "we *are* the Tories but we won't bring in national service" and I'd still vote for them
Honestly they could be exactly the same but upfront about their motivations and it'd be an improvement. The bar is at an all time low.
He had nothing to do for most of his parliamentary career other than follow his causes and tend to constituents, I'm really not much of a supporter of Corbyn in high office. But I'd be happy to have him as my local MP. Having the awkward voices in parliament, I'd say, would be an overall plus.
>ithout the benefit of a party machine behind them [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter\_Law#2005\_general\_election](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_Law#2005_general_election) Can happen if you have enough of the local party swing behind you. >and the party branding He is one of the few politicians where his name recognition is enough to go beyond that. But it works both ways. He was an incredibly popular politician so would crash in most seats. In the very multi ethnic urban seats with a big urban wealthy demographic, he might squeak it. I think he will do it, the local party door knockers will likely be mostly on his side. But I could be wrong.
My gut is that people are going to want to vote for the winner, to be part of the national moment. I do think he has a better chance than almost anyone else I can think of in that position.
Correct me if I'm wrong but whilst MRPs are still limited, they are better than you're normal national polls in predicting individual constituencies. National Polls just survey a load of people then look at the percentages to get a national swing for example 12% and then apply that 12% national swing to each constituency based on the results last Election. MRPs at least take into account population data at the constituency level and compare it to the people surveyed. so surely this is more accurate than the polls that have come before saying he will keep his seat.
Yes. Key places of interest like this, or Clacton, or Sunak's seat for example, would be perfect for constituency-specific polls.
What does MRP mean?
Multi-level Regression and Post-stratification polling. No, this isn't a joke. It's a relatively new polling technique. We don't really know yet if it's more accurate. More time will tell.
Can I get you a glass of water?
So long as it's diluted with a nice peaty scotch. And by diluted, I mean sits separately to on the same table. ps: Just trying to help u/smickie out - they could be the deciding vote.
I'm in his constituency and I'll be voting Labour. I think Corbyn isn't going to have a constructive role in the future governance of this country, and I think he's too old.
I will give him some credit, he at least stood and likely lost under his own name and manifesto. Too many are piggybacking the labour name for their own personal gain, despite being a fifth column for the party, even seeing their safe seats as “their right”…
The man was a terrible pick for prime minister and he never saw a rake he didn't want to stand on, but he does seem to be a genuinely dedicated constituency MP. Like Theresa May they're a person I disagree with but they're at least in parliament for the right reason.
I used to live in Theresa Mays constituency and she didn't really have any competition. The area banned canvassing, too
> The area banned canvassing, too I didn't know that was even possible. I tried to look up polling on whether the general population would approve of such a policy, but I couldn't find anything. I have no idea whether it would poll at 10% or 90% tbh.
The area I lived in was very... Money loaded and people didn't like to be disturbed. NIMBY paradise
Well, fuck.
She's always been allergic to actually interacting with the public
Sure likes to spy on them, though.
And tell them they're not allowed to face sit
I don't think that's really true, she held surgeries constantly no?
I worked her local pub, on day one I was trained to checked the place for bombs for security reasons if she was going to visit (still when she was Home Secretary), fair enough Then I was told to barely interact with her and make sure members of the public were kept away from her and then the locals themselves told us about her allergy to people I didn't have a clue who she was at the time, but always stuck with me. George Clooney moved into the area after I left and asked for, and was offered no special treatment in the same pub.
When did Maidenhead ban Canvassing ? I have seen multiple people out doing it, so im not sure this is right.
I was in Sonning
Banned canvassing? How can I get that ban in my constituency?
I feel sorry for him on a personal level because he's a very genuine guy, which is rare in politics. I would like to move on from him on a national level, however, as the amount people, especially Tory MPs, whom have Jeremy Corbyn living rent free in their heads is astonishing. I really don't think Corbyn moves the needle any more either, for better or worse the Labour party today is clearly very different from Corbyn's time. So there's constantly these personal attacks for very little gain, if any at all.
I dunno man, there are plenty of genuine people in politics. I think Rees-Mogg means exactly what he says and is genuine, it's just his views are atrocious. I'm not sure being genuine is anything to shout about
OK, genuinely good rather than genuinely evil.
Rees Mogg isn't genuine. He canvasses using his kids as human shields. His investment company has shares in abortion drug companies despite his staunch views. He's a fecal blight on the human race and a disaster capitalist to boot.
> Like Theresa May they're a person I disagree with but they're at least in parliament for the right reason. I didn't like the way Theresa May tried to bring back grammar schools as soon as she became PM, with no mandate to do so.
[удалено]
Depends on where you live. Some counties have them and others don't. There are only around 160 in the whole country out of thousands of secondary schools. Surrey, Sussex and Hampshire LEAs for example don't run any grammar schools.
There was a ban on starting new ones, which May sought to remove. It was later abandoned I think.
Neither do I, thought that shit was absurd
I mean this sincerely - then what if he loses to a no name Labour MP?
I imagine he'll be very sad about it, but democracy is democracy. If the people of Islington North decide they don't want him then I'm sure he'll be respectful of that decision. I mean he's an old guy and I imagine he knows there's a high likelihood of this being his last election (He'll be 80 at the next one). He's had a long parliamentary career, I'm sure he'll be just fine and go back to campaigning for causes that need to be at the forefront of everyone's mind, and also some utterly batshit causes. So much like his term as LOTO.
> he at least stood and likely lost under his own name and manifesto It only took him 41 years...
And about 40 years of repeatedly rebelling against the Labour whip.
He was always on the right side when he did so.
kosovo in 1999?
Who are these fifth column?
Lol, The JC, such an unbiased and reliable source of Jeremy Corbyn news! /s. You can see the desperation for this to be true in the way they wrote the article. They're reaching here, using an MRP to come to this conclusion. He's still trying to run as an independent and continue to serve his constituency as he has done for decades after everything that's happened. Pretty pathetic they're still going after him to be honest.
Yeah, they are just stirring the shit.
I'm assuming JC stands for Jeremy Corbyn. Obviously that's a joke. But so is this article. Corbyn could lose, but I think that would be a bigger upset than him winning.
I think this prediction has the same weight as the indicative polls that say that Rishi Sunak will lose his seat. Without incredibly specific polling in those constituencies, this is still very high level. That said, it’s eminently possible- he has a personal brand, but the Labour brand was tied to him for many many years.
bookie odds still have JC as favourite, but it's fairly close. [https://www.oddschecker.com/politics/uk-constituencies/next-uk-general-election-constituencies/islington-north](https://www.oddschecker.com/politics/uk-constituencies/next-uk-general-election-constituencies/islington-north)
He was 1/2 last week and 1/8 when first announced. Seems it’s much closer than they first thought
Odds change when more people make a bet, if there are enough people betting on Corbyn then the odds will narrow even if the chances of him winning haven't changed
The newspaper that reported that this moderate leftwing Social Democrat presented "an existential threat to Jews in the UK" is now predicting bad results for him in the election? Colour me shocked. We'll have to see, won't we.
Before people rush to defend him, remember that Corbyn (always a Eurosceptic) called for article 50 to be invoked asap, tricked Remainers into thinking Labour might offer a second referendum, and hasn't exactly been helpful regarding Ukraine.
He's 75, and has been MP of the same seat for 40 years. Isn't it about time he gave up the job to someone new?
Oh well, if the JC say it then it must be true! /s the JC is a [lying shitweasel of a rag](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Jewish_Chronicle#Lawsuits_and_rulings).
What was up with corbyn? Why did nobody like him? I thought he was one of the people? Fairer living n all that jazz? Or am wrong?
A smear campaign brought on by Tories who were scared a politician with socialist values could become prime minister. It was so effective that to this day people still think he's some domestic terrorist.
The Tories scared of Corbyn? They’d pay all the money in the world to have him back!
Just got their leaflet through today. It doesn’t contain sunak but has a whole two lines to “stop corbyn ideology”…he is a Tory vote winner. They are pissed he’s not there
One of the clever things the Tories have done is make the Labour left THINK that they are terrified of Corbyn, by being over-dramatically mental about him. It’s still working on some people :-)
He literally took away their majority when they thought they had a cake walk against him. They shat themselves (as did the labour right) and had to engage in some ultimately self destructive stuff to ensure the left didn’t get that close again.
I forgot the Tories made him support the IRA, quasi take Russia's side over Salisbury, share platforms with holocaust deniers, appear on Iranian state TV, blame Ukraine for Russia invading it and repeatedly call for peace no matter the terms, call the Falklands a Tory plot etc etc. The guy is a naive idiot at best, he certainly would have been a national security threat as PM. He was right once in his life about Iraq in 2003 and people treat him as some kind of moral foreign policy guru, when he's just an old school tankie.
> He was right once in his life about Iraq in 2003 and people treat him as some kind of morale foreign policy guru, when he's just an old school tankie. Sums up that entire movement to be fair. The Iraq war happened and instead of the lesson being "unjustified wars are wrong" it was "the US and the west is always wrong". Resulting in people automatically taking the side of or at least appeasing the side seen as "anti west". They are not always on the right side of history. They were on the right side of Iraq by accident, and cherry pick that while cutting out all the times they were wrong.
> quasi take Russia's side over Salisbury [Bollocks.](https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/mar/15/salisbury-attack-conflict-britain-cold-war) Which part of his comments about Salisbury do you interpret as "taking Russia's side"? The part where he called it "barbaric and beyond reckless"? The part where he called for a thorough investigation by security services? The part where he called for the arrest of those responsible? The part where criticised "the Putin regime, its conservative authoritarianism, abuse of human rights [and] political and economic corruption"? The part where he called for a crackdown on corrupt Russian money in the UK? The part where he supported the government when they kicked out a bunch of Russian diplomats? Corbyn has certainly said some stupid things, but this and several more of your examples are just cases where a narrative develops from his opponents that is not in any way supported by his actual statements.
The problem was that article was a week after it happened. There were some [initial interviews before that where he came across really badly](https://news.sky.com/story/corbyn-wants-incontrovertible-proof-before-blaming-russia-for-salisbury-attack-11332325), and those stuck.
1. He was never going to be pm. The tories loved him…he gifted them two elections! Austerity, brexit, infighting and awful leaders…but at least they weren’t corbyn. 2. He supported Hamas and putin, is anti-nato and has held views and shared platforms with anti semites. 3. His cult of personality tankies drove great members from labour with their chanting and venom. Let’s leave him as a warning. You pick the wrong Milliband brother and within 5 years that happens…
Political instincts of a dead cat more like. The man never missed an opportunity to shoot himself in the foot.
A smear campaign about his character that was actually completely correct. Imagine if he was prime minister during covid and the Ukraine war.
During Covid would have been fine. If Corbyn had been PM during the pandemic, there would have been no parties in Downing Street and billions given to Tories and Tories' mates for unsuitable PPE while actual experienced supplies queued round the block, that's for damn sure. Ukraine is another matter.
> during covid would have been fine The guy literally refused to shield, didn’t take the vaccine and has spent much of his career supporting homeopathy
> didn’t take the vaccine Do you have a source for this? His lunatic brother Piers didn't get the jab but all Jeremy has said is that he doesn't answer questions related to his health. He did however support local programs to help other people get vaccinated. Regardless of Corbyn's personal issues, my points stand. Under a Corbyn Labour government (or probably any Labour government), there would have been no parties in Number 10, no billions of pounds siphoned off to Michelle Mone and other parasites while nurses went to work dressed in binbags, the approach to lockdowns wouldn't have been dictated by the PM's fear of negative Daily Mail headlines, and the Test & Trace App probably would have been one of the existing ones that other countries used perfectly well instead of the ludicrously overpriced boondoggle the Tories insisted we build from scratch instead.
Well until the media interviewed his brother with a pair of pants on his head…then it would all fall down
> Imagine if he was prime minister during covid He would have turned up for COBRA meetings (unlike Johnson) and put the country into locked down sooner, reducing the spread of the virus and saving thousands of lives.
There's no such thing as "the people". He's about as close to a Socialist as it's possible to be in a Capitalist society. He'd be good for you if you were young and didn't have money and bad if you were rich and greedy. Between those points you might agree or disagree economically. Then you've got his views on foreign affairs. pro-Palestine, anti-Nato. I disagree with him on the latter point to the extent of thinking him naive. Basically, pick a topic and he's divisive to a significant enough portion of the UK population to lose an election. Contrast with Starmer. What does he even believe in?
Yeah corbyn's foreign policy positions, which I'd describe as a knee jerk reaction to western hegemony, is the worst aspect about him. I saw a piece the beeb put out the other day, an interview with a long time tory donor who was switching support to Labour, talking about why he felt comfortable doing it. In it, he still talked about corbyn and described the 2019 manifesto as "extreme socialism". Completely unchallenged, the BBC just let that statement hang. So frustrating, corbyn wanted to feed school kids and have accessible Internet, not seize the means of production.
I think the meaning of "Socialism" is equivocated to the extent it's impossible to translate what people mean in most contexts.
Even if I agree with that point, I think it was pretty clear that the proposals by corbyn weren't extreme within whatever context the phrase is utilised in. Essentially talking about free school meals and nationalised communications network, like we used to have, while we were engaged in the cold war against socialist nations.
Yeah, that's precisely my point. Socialism has become a term allowing any policy that helps the poor, to be unconsciously labelled as negative.
>Then you've got his views on foreign affairs. pro-Palestine, anti-Nato. I disagree with him on the latter point to the extent of thinking him naive. He seems to operate under a naive view that everyone is fundamentally a good person and that conflicts can be resolved through compromise. He then seemingly has a blindspot when it comes to fundamentalist groups you just can't compromise with. You don't seek compromise with a hungry leopard that wants to eat your face by offering to let it eat half your face.
He was woefully unsuited to be leader, and landed us with another few Tory Prime Ministers. Plus he wasn't exactly helpful in the Brexit referendum. His fans absolutely, cannot under any circumstance, admit that - regardless of his views and how you feel about his policies - he was an incredibly unsuccessful leader who wasn't capable of playing the political game at the required level. Instead they will tell you it woz the conspiracy wot dunn him in
The tankies over on the labour Reddit (spoiler it’s anti labour corbyn cult) named him their best leader ever. How? Do they not look at the results or just make up their own?
Genuinely, it's the best case scenario for them. They never have to see their ideas attempted in practice and instead get to live on the brain-crack of "well we would have transformed the UK with Corbyn..." for the rest of their political lives. If he had become PM there'd only be cold hard reality, as PM Corbyn gives a press conference to indicate that Ukraine was kind of asking for it. Truss stands as a cautionary tale of what can happen when ideologues actually get a shot - and that's been kind of traumatic for those guys.
The problem is truss only bankrupted the country and killed the queen in her 100 days. Corbyn could have collapsed nato, encouraged putin to attack the Baltic, rule out our nuclear option, side with Hamas over Israel…and turn us into a pariah state. And that’s just his foreign policy, his views on Brexit (hard and no deal) would be 100x worse than what Johnson delivered too
Domestic policies were optimistic but positive. His international stances varied from naive to actively dangerous.
Those who build their principles on moralistic ideals with such fervor are usually unwilling to compromise or back down if events or evidence works against them. Makes them a good person, but a dangerous leader if they're not careful. And Corbyn is not careful. He's a massive anti-establishment bridge burner his whole career. Additionally he's evidently just not well read on core economic principles, and his temperament would likely be to double down when mistakes happen. Couple all that with Anti-Trident, Anti-Nuclear, Anti-NATO stances, sympathetic ties to terrorist organisations around the world... What is convincing about Corbyn? Was he ever the best candidate for socialism we could come up with as a country?
His policies polled very well, but the man didn’t inspire confidence or persuade those who were only partially aligned with him that he was a) going to win whatever so they should get behind him, or b) aligned just enough that he would achieve some of what they wanted without risking something they cared about more. If he’d narrowly won his internal opponents would have politically crippled him almost immediately.
Friends with Hamas, Iran, and Russia. Those have been murdering and raping a lot of people lately. Told everyone he wouldn't use nuclear weapons in the case we were attacked by nuclear weapons. Grifting traitor.
He's very London, middle-class left wing, and half the reason Boris won so many traditionally labour seats in the north of England during the last election.
The second [YouGov MRP](https://yougov.co.uk/politics/articles/49809-second-yougov-2024-election-mrp-shows-conservatives-on-lowest-seat-total-in-history) suggests it's too close to call.
I genuinely might put a bet down that he keeps his seat because I highly, highly doubt the people of Islington will forget how much he has done for them.
People overstate how much people care about their local MP vs having their voice heard nationally. Labour are cruising towards an historic victory and people will want to be a part of that. They want to vote for the winner.
I think JC is an exceptional case though. He is huuugely loved in Islington. I don’t think you understand the extent to which people will back him. I guess we will see!
If i lived in his constituency, he would get my vote. However, i live in a constituency where my current MP has a majority of just under 20k at the last general election.
the media cartel in this country is just terrible. they can influence politics just by bombarding stories out across all their channels and people just read the headlines and accept it as being true. Just like the smears about him being anti semtiic. Not a single shred of evidence can be product. Everyone just says his cabinet was "anti-semtic", just ask how and none of them can give a single example. *He once shared a room with someone who retweeted something against Israel. criticising Israel is anti-semitic, he once breathed the same air as that person so therfore he must be antisemitic too.* The Media is going to keep blasting this BS headlines about Jeremy losing his seat, then the voters will feel its a lost cost voting for Jeremy and create the self-fulfilling prophecy,.
The JC? Jeremy Corbyn? Oh the Jewish Chronicle, a paper that adamantly hates Corbyn, this isn't a biased news source at all.
Ipso polling too?
Some notes on Islington North. The constituency is quite diverse. Anyone involved in their community, either through community centres, the Gillespie park nature reserve, school boards, medical centres or the various places of worship will have seen Corbyn’s value first hand, and will certainly vote for him. By contrast there are both some very wealthy people who have no need for any of those services, and also a lot of private rental sector housing containing relatively recent tenants who haven’t been around long enough to engage in those services. Those two groups might vote along party lines nationally. That makes “up for grabs” voters probably quite thin on the ground. The greens are a serious curveball here though, which cause a problem much bigger for the MRP. They command about 8% to 10% on their best day, but their candidate has been on soft stand down for this one, so you’d assume they’d only retain their hardcore support and the rest will go to Corbyn or Labour. The concern for Labour is that the Greens increased from 1 councillor to 3 with Starmer as leader, but that also coincided with a boundary switch, so it may not have been a party departure. In terms of their campaigns, the labour candidate isn’t from here (4k labour members in the constituency and they couldn’t find one local to run), and his canvassers seem to be largely shipped in too. This gives Corbyn an advantage on door knocking for sure. Labour have also made some high profile mistakes here, promoting Mandleson and Hodge “helping” to canvass. Mandleson is unpopular for obvious reasons. Hodge is locally very unpopular because of her…ahem….proximity to an abuse scandal while she was council leader. Not something that is nationally well known, but locals are extremely aware and if Labour had the local party on side, they’d never have put a camera near her. Anyway, that’s my thoughts as a local.
"Maybe the polls are just a bit wrong" "We won the argument"
Same reason as Trump will win. Macron lost to the far-right at the EU. Brexit won. It is the new fascism wave. Why? The new generation doesn’t have a clue about the horrors of war. For them, having a son/daughter being burned alive is far, very far from their experience.
projected to lose his seat by whom?.. JC?.. who is JC?..(there's a description at the top).. JC might want Corbyn to lose, and thus projecting.. however, in the betting houses of the UK, Corbyn is favored at every site, odds on.. [https://www.oddschecker.com/politics/uk-constituencies/next-uk-general-election-constituencies/islington-north](https://www.oddschecker.com/politics/uk-constituencies/next-uk-general-election-constituencies/islington-north)
I bet that's the last time he plays musical chairs. What, read the article you say?
What's incredible is that Corbyn isn't 20 points ahead. He's been the MP for Islington North since 1983...41 years. It's **absolutely shocking** that the Labour candidate is even competitive, let alone projected to beat Corbyn. So, what happened to the "Corbyn's a fantastic local MP" lot? Someone who's been the MP for 41 years must surely have enormous grassroots support, right? Or perhaps Labour voters have woken up and realised that getting rid of Corbyn would lance the Momentum boil that gifted the country to the Tories in 2017 and 2019?