That Starmer fella...

I think Corbyn's reputation as a radical made his policies seem more extreme than they were.

I think that's true. But Corbyn also used that word to identify himself and his policies / manifesto, so it's hardly surprising that people associated him with that word.

I think peopel learn the wrong lesson about Blair. It's not that sensible politicians win votes; it's that when people trust a politician, they have more latitude to deliver serious change. I think Blair could've been a lot bolder than Corbyn ever was and people would've accepted it much more willingly.

I agree with all of that. I do get the sense that's the plan, but the extended period of keeping the powder dry is making lots of people unsure if his views are strong enough.

School success is positively correlated to house prices right? Once an area starts going up in value then a decade later the schools begin improving as Noah and Olivia's parents roll up their sleeves and expose their pointy elbows to the school bosses.

It would be good to get a big load of this data and weight it all for these other sorts of macro factors that are likely more powerful than whether an academy has been created or not.

Not that I'm down on schools, the ones we're looking at now for our eldest are all in the Gypsy Hill Federation and are all good or outstanding. Just think that Labour could land a real blow on education if it was more coherent than me on why academies are not all they appear, why education is so valuable in a technology enabled, service based economy, why making university free for everyone is a drop in the ocean, why Oxbridge is tyrannical, why only a Labour govt can be trusted to deliver educational reform for the good of the average person.

Also, the NHS seems to be off the table now as Joe Public (clapper) thinks the Tories have done a solid job on it through C19. So, what else do you have, Education (discussed above), Law & Order (a lot less crime because everyone at home), International Relations (Brexit hot potato)..

Lots of those who do not/ no longer support Starmer have left the party, so that question is giving a false conclusion.

Lots of those who do not/ no longer support Starmer have left the party, so that question is giving a false conclusion.

Around 10% according to the latest figures. In no way would such a small drop explain such high approval figures.

10% drop between April and November 2020 (when your article was published). 5 further months since then.

My understanding was that the way schools are funded meant that academies got more, but tbh I can't recall where I saw that so take that with a pinch of salt....

It's tricky to understand. I did a bit of reading earlier. They do get more but there are also more mouths to feed along the way so maybe parity? I dunno.

The graphs you show seem to reinforce tbc's point, not disprove it.

Your first image doesn't even include Starmer, the second shows Starmer below Corbyn's GE2017 level, and the last image shows the entirety of Labour's polling under Starmer below Cobyn's Labour 2017 to 2019.

You've misunderstood the graphs I'm afraid. The first graph doesn't show Starmer, you're right, it shows Corbyn in context. The second graph does show Corbyn vs Starmer and while it shows that Starmer's approval ratings are currently negative, it also shows that Corbyn's were never anything but. The third graph was just there to show how easy it is to compare odd points of data between the two parties to create any picture you want - which you've done. (Corbyn's Labour was polling under Starmer's for almost all of 2019, and prior to the 2017 GE.)

10% drop between April and November 2020 (when your article was published). 5 further months since then.

If you've better figures I'm happy to use those instead but I don't think they exist yet. The last I saw from the NEC was that membership had actually risen.

The most accurate poll from 2017 was the one on 8 June which had Corbyn on 40%.

I'm not using this to suggest he is a better leader than Starmer - he patently was not very good at all.

But the best Starmer is faring in any poll at the moment is 38%, and that is a real indictment.

Playing it safe hasn't worked, poor performance in the Scottish and local elections will compound it, and if we'd rather have a Labour than Conservative government it's a problem.

London school success is largely down to the London Challenge under the last Labour government, but to bring that up now is a risk because:

• It was clearly a very London-centric policy although it was partially rolled out in other areas later
  
• London has some real advantages in terms of teacher recruitment and retention that the places with the worst quality schools don't have (e.g. post-industrial or former fishing towns)
  
• London has different demographics (fewer pupils from the lowest-achieving groups)
  
• It costs money and spending on education is frivolous and wasteful when we need more nuclear weapons and warships
  

Academies are directly funded by central government rather than LEAs, and tend to get the services that LEAs used to provide more cheaply and so can spend more on executive heads' inflated salaries.

tbc specifically said Starmer is below Corbyn after GE2017, which the data you presented agrees with. That's not clear evidence that they are wrong is it?

Whether that's cherry picking is another discussion, but calling 2 years of Corbyn's Labour polling a blip is quite disingenuous.

It makes me a bit sad to say so, but I think Labour won't win a majority ever again - no matter who is leader.

There is now far too much tension between the metropolitan and red wall wings for either side to coalesce around any leader sufficiently enough to win a majority under FPTP - in a landscape where Scotland is lost and not coming back, and where the ruling Conservative party are - economically at least - pretty much Brownite.

It will be painful but Labour needs to split - properly - not in the half arsed Change UK way - and allow the radical wing to do its own thing, but remain on friendly enough terms with the other wing for an electoral pact in such constituencies as necessary in order to get a majority.

spending on education is frivolous and wasteful when we need more nuclear weapons and warships

🙌🏻

Wasn't the comment specifically that it was cherry picking? That's not "another discussion", it's literally the discussion being had.

I don't know what to say about the labour polling from 2017 - 19. It didn't help, did it? It led up to a disastrous result.

Sounds like a winning system (for someone?)

If Blair had accepted the recommendations of the Jenkins Report, rather than kicking it into the long grass, the country could look so so different now.

We are committed to a referendum on the voting system for the House of Commons. An independent commission on voting systems will be appointed early to recommend a proportional alternative to the first-past-the-post system.

The Lib Dems half-hearted attempt at electoral reform should probably get a mention as well.

The Lib Dems got absolutely shafted on that, and they've only got themselves to blame for it.

They should have made a much better Coalition Agreement with red lines on it - for example, not a referendum on an electoral system they didn't want with the Conservatives actively campaigning against them.

Same with their intended House of Lords reform, which got as far as the Second Reading in the Commons.

Indeed. As should Labour's failure to get fully behind the Yes vote in 2011 - no doubt partly due to the arrogance that they will always be a potential party of majority government, and so AV was not needed for them (yes I know AV was a shit option, but it was the best that could've been expected at the time).

I am hopeful that ten years in the wilderness for Labour, at least for their more rational MPs, may have helped to amend that attitude of being the sole possible alternative to the Tories, and hence more open to the idea of a fairer voting system, but we shall see.

Accusing someone of cherry picking is different to saying the data clearly shows they are wrong.