villaajax Posted November 9, 2014 Share Posted November 9, 2014 Having looked at that graph you'll know that Labour membership was on the slide from around 1998 to 2010 when it went back up and has leveled out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dont_do_it_doug. Posted November 9, 2014 Share Posted November 9, 2014 Yes Russell, if you say so Fixed. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
colhint Posted November 9, 2014 Share Posted November 9, 2014 Having looked at that graph you'll know that Labour membership was on the slide from around 1998 to 2010 when it went back up and has leveled out. So it's not rising at all then Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
villaajax Posted November 9, 2014 Share Posted November 9, 2014 2010 was when Ed Miliband took over which is when it rose... an insignificant drop in 2012 then back up again. If you believe when the dirstsheets are saying you'd expect Labour membership to be dropping... which it isn't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sharkyvilla Posted November 9, 2014 Share Posted November 9, 2014 No names to these rumoured back benchers though, no real substance to these stories. Not sure about specific names, but surely you'd be harder pushed to find people who think he isn't a hopeless mong and any Labour majority would have to be in spite of him. I don't see what they have to lose at all by getting rid, in fact I think it would give them the necessary push to get a comfortable majority, especially if they went for Umunna. I know I'm boiling it purely down to personality but it's not as if this election is likely to be decided either way by political genius. The Daily Mail's enthusiasm for a coup against Ed seems to suggest that they see some political advantage in it. Well the Hate Mail will take huge pleasure in goading Labour about it knowing there won't be a coup. If there was one then they'd have egg on their face pretty quick I reckon come the election. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drat01 Posted November 9, 2014 Share Posted November 9, 2014 Having looked at that graph you'll know that Labour membership was on the slide from around 1998 to 2010 when it went back up and has leveled out. So it's not rising at all then As compared to the other major parties then the membership of the Labour party is significantly healthier than the others. Now (before the idiocy of deflection and ahhh but comes from .....) if you then take that into context the membership certainly is not showing a unhapiness with the leadership. Agreed? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drat01 Posted November 9, 2014 Share Posted November 9, 2014 No names to these rumoured back benchers though, no real substance to these stories. Not sure about specific names, but surely you'd be harder pushed to find people who think he isn't a hopeless mong and any Labour majority would have to be in spite of him. I don't see what they have to lose at all by getting rid, in fact I think it would give them the necessary push to get a comfortable majority, especially if they went for Umunna. I know I'm boiling it purely down to personality but it's not as if this election is likely to be decided either way by political genius. "hopeless mong" - what a crass thing to say 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
colhint Posted November 9, 2014 Share Posted November 9, 2014 Having looked at that graph you'll know that Labour membership was on the slide from around 1998 to 2010 when it went back up and has leveled out. So it's not rising at all then As compared to the other major parties then the membership of the Labour party is significantly healthier than the others. Now (before the idiocy of deflection and ahhh but comes from .....) if you then take that into context the membership certainly is not showing a unhapiness with the leadership. Agreed? Not disagreeing with your evaluation. Just pointing out the claim that membership is rising, is a false claim. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drat01 Posted November 9, 2014 Share Posted November 9, 2014 Having looked at that graph you'll know that Labour membership was on the slide from around 1998 to 2010 when it went back up and has leveled out. So it's not rising at all then As compared to the other major parties then the membership of the Labour party is significantly healthier than the others. Now (before the idiocy of deflection and ahhh but comes from .....) if you then take that into context the membership certainly is not showing a unhapiness with the leadership. Agreed? Not disagreeing with your evaluation. Just pointing out the claim that membership is rising, is a false claim. Nit and picking are waiting at the door - they have received an invite :-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
villaajax Posted November 9, 2014 Share Posted November 9, 2014 Having looked at that graph you'll know that Labour membership was on the slide from around 1998 to 2010 when it went back up and has leveled out. So it's not rising at all then As compared to the other major parties then the membership of the Labour party is significantly healthier than the others. Now (before the idiocy of deflection and ahhh but comes from .....) if you then take that into context the membership certainly is not showing a unhapiness with the leadership. Agreed? Not disagreeing with your evaluation. Just pointing out the claim that membership is rising, is a false claim. Nit and picking are waiting at the door - they have received an invite :-) Nit picking and ignoring the facts Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
colhint Posted November 9, 2014 Share Posted November 9, 2014 I'd say I wasn't the one nit picking. The earlier claim that Labour membership was on the rise, Is quite clearly false. It was not I who compared it to other parties, or taking it in any context whatsoever. I just pointed out the error Having looked at that graph you'll know that Labour membership was on the slide from around 1998 to 2010 when it went back up and has leveled out. So it's not rising at all then As compared to the other major parties then the membership of the Labour party is significantly healthier than the others. Now (before the idiocy of deflection and ahhh but comes from .....) if you then take that into context the membership certainly is not showing a unhapiness with the leadership. Agreed? Not disagreeing with your evaluation. Just pointing out the claim that membership is rising, is a false claim. Nit and picking are waiting at the door - they have received an invite :-) Nit picking and ignoring the facts What facts? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
villaajax Posted November 9, 2014 Share Posted November 9, 2014 *sigh* the fact that membership is up since Ed Miliband became leader and it's actually risen this year by 2000 members... it's the point I've been telling you all afternoon. Using the stats that you have allegedly looked at yourself. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CarewsEyebrowDesigner Posted November 9, 2014 Share Posted November 9, 2014 no need to labour the point 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tonyh29 Posted November 9, 2014 Share Posted November 9, 2014 No names to these rumoured back benchers though, no real substance to these stories. Not sure about specific names, but surely you'd be harder pushed to find people who think he isn't a hopeless mong and any Labour majority would have to be in spite of him. I don't see what they have to lose at all by getting rid, in fact I think it would give them the necessary push to get a comfortable majority, especially if they went for Umunna. I know I'm boiling it purely down to personality but it's not as if this election is likely to be decided either way by political genius. The Daily Mail's enthusiasm for a coup against Ed seems to suggest that they see some political advantage in it. It was the Guardian Close but no buffalo Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
colhint Posted November 9, 2014 Share Posted November 9, 2014 Having looked at that graph you'll know that Labour membership was on the slide from around 1998 to 2010 when it went back up and has leveled out. So which of your statements are true. 1. Its on the rise 2 It rose in 2010 and has leveled out 3 an insignificant drop in 2012 and back to where it was 4 listening to the press you would think its dropping 5 Its risen by 2000 this year. You have claimed all to be the case Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
villaajax Posted November 9, 2014 Share Posted November 9, 2014 Yes! We've finally made a bit of a breakthrough! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
colhint Posted November 9, 2014 Share Posted November 9, 2014 ok I'll take your claim that its leveled out to be the true one then. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tonyh29 Posted November 9, 2014 Share Posted November 9, 2014 2010 was when Ed Miliband took over which is when it rose... an insignificant drop in 2012 then back up again. If you believe when the dirstsheets are saying you'd expect Labour membership to be dropping... which it isn't. Was that 2010 increase in May as a result of the coalition (as Google suggests )or in September when Ed got given power by the unions ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
villaajax Posted November 9, 2014 Share Posted November 9, 2014 ok I'll take your claim that its leveled out to be the true one then. You seem to be hard of understanding so I've knocked together a quick graph using some rough figures. If it's good enough for the so called 'treasury', it's good enough for you. I've removed the Tories' and Lib Dems' lines as it will only cause more confusion. As hopefully you can see by looking at that red line, you may want to follow it with your finger, it starts off on a slope, then when it gets to the year 2010, it noticeably goes upwards then levels out (the upwards bit shows an increase in support). In 2012, you'll notice it goes downwards a little bit but have no fear, it soon goes back to where it was before. The chart I've referenced from the House of Commons website goes to 2013 as we don't have a final figure for 2014 as the year hasn't ended just yet. However, harnessing the power of Google, the only reference I could find to 2014 membership would suggest it is up by around 2000 members on last year. That means that red line would be going upwards again a little bit. As I said, it's only a very rough graph I've drawn up on MS Paint but hopefully it may help you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
coda Posted November 9, 2014 Share Posted November 9, 2014 It's gonna be a long six months. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts