Robin Hood wrote:That was the attitude of the experts with both the UK Referendum and the US Presidency, they became complacent and convinced by their own propaganda. Then look what happened ? They were proved wrong! So don't bury Jeremy yet ...... he
could just end up surprising everyone ..... even himself.
Corbyn says what he will (
wants) to do and May does nothing but point out why she thinks every thing he proposed is pie-in-the-sky and has to fail ...... she does not put out a message ..... she just runs down the opposition! That approach has now failed twice in the UK and the US. Just listening to BFBS (BBC) and the '
experts' spouting forth with their opinions and already they are beginning to hedge their bets, that projection of confidence in their appraisals is less so and they are allowing for the possibility of a reversal.
You're really talking about entirely different things.
Polling leading up to both the UK referendum and US election showed that there was very little in it near the events. IIRC, Remain and Clinton were just a few percentage points ahead and in the run up there was never an enormous difference.
Despite the fact that, as you point out, the gap has narrowed, the Tories are still 18% ahead of Labour today.
As far as May just running down the opposition is concerned, that hasn't been the impression I've gotten so far. Although of course that's her job! Today's press seems full of Tory policy initiatives.
One of Corbyn's biggest problems is not that he has the expected Conservative detractors and so-called media bias but that for two years and even during this campaign he's been regularly vilified by his own Parliamentarians.
Nothing would ever surprise me in politics (I still won't believe Brexit, until it actually happens). However, if Corbyn is elected PM then I would be quite willing to eat my hat (if I had one
). Whilst I know you are in love with "Peoples' QE" I suspect the economic tsunami which would inevitably follow in the wake of a Corbyn victory would make Brexit look like a tiny ripple. The effect on confidence in the pound would probably be disastrous, for instance. How much of a return would you want, to lend him money?
I would point out that John McDonnell would be Chancellor and Diane Abbott Home Secretary. If you have the time you might want to do a bit of research on those two and imagine the economy and national security/crime in their hands.
Really though, is the way ahead actually to return to the 70s (we were both there)? Nationalisation on an epic scale. Union powers restored (they have over 100 Trade Union demands in the current Labour Manifesto. Many have been incorporated verbatim). National wage bargaining, secondary picketing, et al. All restored. Sounds like misery for the many and not the few to me. It would be interesting for a while of course. Until, as ever, they drove the economy onto the rocks and ran out of money.
Speaking of which. Corbyn's policy on Brexit seems to be that we will leave but actually stay in. He's stated that he wouldn't accept the situation where there was no trade deal. Clearly then, the EU can offer him whatever it does or doesn't feel like. The same mistake Cameron made when he went to Brussels, with quite a modest list of reforms, before the referendum campaign. They knew he was going to opt for remain, whatever happened. So, he came away without even a fig leaf. They shoulda gone to Specsavers.
I suspect what Tim is suggesting is that you changed horses in mid-stream when it became Putin's policy to support Corbyn. But then, knowing how you are a person who despises the gullible naive and can think outside the box I'm sure that isn't the case at all.
