Rayvin

Raynor possibly. I have a lot of respect for her achievements. Single mum, strong working class roots, fought from the bottom for where she had to get to. Will truly understand the challenges working class people face. Alternatively someone who has been low profile, younger and with a bit more fire. Before Corbyn came along, as a centrist option, I was going to support Yvette Cooper. She still has my respect also.

Long Bailey isn't the answer.

Yes it is indeed, for now. I feel like I'm going to be up all night on Thursday..

Looks to me like all the main Remain parties are finally talking about tactical voting. 4 days is leaving it fucking late but LDs have stopped campaigning in some seats, hopefully Labour will do the same in others. I assume we are going to consider a hung parliament a victory at this point.

Not sure that I think he should have lost the court case for something so trivial, but the whole matter did confirm to me that Musk is a thin-skinned fuckhead. In terms of the guy's brand, it's probably done enough damage to teach him a lesson.

He offered to stand down after the leadership debacle the year before. And Labour absolutely viewed 2017 as a victory more than a defeat. Even the Blairites backed off.

Corbyn will resign after this defeat. He never wanted this anyway. Not that there'll be anything left by 2024.

Think I've expressed regret for this in the past. I read his policies and voted for him based on those. Knew nothing of the man. It is indeed my fault, in part.

Tactical voting is trending at the moment - a lot of LDs and Greens seem ready to go Labour. Even a few SNP voters. All anecdotal but you never know...

They will. Their country depends on them. Time to stand up for Britain! They'll come out of the voting booth feeling like they've made the same personal sacrifice as someone who died at the Somme. The wankers.

Next Tory statement on this will be something about the public having had enough of civil servants/diplomats.

Honestly, maybe I'm wrong. It's just that circulation figures have more broadly held up for broadsheets than tabloids, right? I assume readership is more or less along class lines. Who knows, it's not a major point I guess.

I came across this interview earlier today on LBC - a guy who was born on a council estate recounting his story. He was the only one of his 7 peers who didn't end up trapped in that estate, and he managed to dig himself out of his situation by virtue of the £30 a week maintenance allowance that the Tories have now done away with. He has since gone on to be a productive member of society, tax paying and happy with his life. He believes it would be absolutely impossible for him to have managed that without the maintenance allowance. It's a really good interview, not even especially politically loaded. He considers it to be basically impossible now for someone in his position to achieve the same thing. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y9IBpyqLKDA I don't know why it isn't embedding, but it's worth a watch.

I recognise the good natured humour in this Maybe I'm wrong and the working classes are digesting loads of youtube/online political content - it's absolutely possible. I just fancied they're probably still following it in the papers. Not that they're politically ignorant or thick, as such.

Amongst the educated I fully agree, but I'm not sure for the working classes... Hard to imagine them digesting political commentaries, even pro Brexit ones, on YouTube.

I think the media have learned from last time. Too many forces coming together against Labour. Corbyn doesn't help either but I'm certain that we've been stitched up in Tory friendly press rooms this time out. Same as last time really.

Kuennsberg is a waste of space. Seems like something the militant Corbynistas actually got right early on. Of course it makes sense though when you think about it. She's fucking loaded. Of course she wants Boris to win.

I keep wavering dangerously close to this too. The problem is that there will be no satisfying moment of clarity where they realise the truth. It's more likely they'll just starve to death.

How can you expect people to be any different with the amount of misinformation and lying going on man. Maybe we're the crazy ones for being so invested in it. Until the media does it's job properly, which it never will under the Tories, I don't see how this changes.

Nice, our (collectively, across the country) pressure on the BBC to do it's fucking job is actually yielding some results. Let's see if it works.

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/dec/04/bbc-impartiality-precious-protect-election-coverage BBC trying to defend itself. I don’t necessarily subscribe to the view that if we get complaints from both sides, we are doing something right – though we do receive roughly equal volumes of audience feedback suggesting we favour opposite sides of the political spectrum. And to those who have suggested we are somehow cowed or unconfident, let me assure you – we are not. Will believe that last statement when we see it. EDIT - also, what the fuck is the one before it. "I don't necessarily believe this but y'know, if you wanted to justify our bullshit and had no critical thinking skills, you could do so like this..." Fuck off.

Same view - it's actually very noticeable, how much worse it has become.

Not sure. 8 years is a long time even for a time delay. It would explain the 2008-2010 thing maybe, but the 8 years under New Labour, no way. The suddenness with which it turns down as well, strongly suggests that either a new definition was introduced as Renton says, or that they introduced a policy that quickly and effectively started resolving the issue. If it was a slow burner kind, I don't think it would start dropping so suddenly. I reckon no one in Labour was paying any attention to it until around 2005 when they realised it was soaring, maybe following some new research, and then they tried to knock it on the head. If it's a time delay issue spanning nearly a decade, the Tories could simply turn around and say that the effects of the financial crisis are still being felt and that's what is pushing the numbers up now.

I think maybe the assumption is that there's a time delay in effects - people eat through their savings, maybe sporadic surveying of the issue? Clearly the Tories came in and swept out whatever was protecting people, although notably they've gone slow and steady (wisely, for their ends). Still doesn't explain what was going on in early New Labour. Non-priority issue maybe? But then it's a bit rich for us to use that now as a stick to beat the Tories with.