voters for labour without Corbyn?

[Nearly Sane]

It's analogous to why I don't believe that Jak would vote labour.

In what way? I don't see how my atheism is analogous in any way to why you doubt jakswan. Or indeed how any analogy from my atheism has anything to do with you doubting a statement of personal choice from jakswan.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

In what way? I don't see how my atheism is analogous in any way to why you doubt jakswan. Or indeed how any analogy from my atheism has anything to do with you doubting a statement of personal choice from jakswan.

I want him to explain any circumstance in which he would vote Labour.

[Nearly Sane]

I want him to explain any circumstance in which he would vote Labour.

And I want you to answer the question I asked. Any chance of that?

[Walt Zingmatilder]

And I want you to answer the question I asked. Any chance of that?

I have.

There is no way anyone can demonstrate how Jak would vote in a Corbyn free election. He has come out as not voting labour. Therefore I need more grounds to believe him since in 2015 people who said they were going to vote Labour obviously didn't and I need more data to form my opinion.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

In what way? I don't see how my atheism is analogous in any way to why you doubt jakswan.

I merely lack belief that Jak would vote for Labour if it wasn't for Corbyn.

[Nearly Sane]

I merely lack belief that Jak would vote for Labour if it wasn't for Corbyn.

Despite the evidence that you think he exists, and he has a vote and he has expressed an opinion? Your idea of an analogy then means that you think your opinion is worthless, You really shouldn't play the relativist position as it shows how ignorant of it you are and indeed how irrelevant it is to the discussion of how jakswan might vote.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Despite the evidence that you think he exists, and he has a vote and he has expressed an opinion? Your idea of an analogy then means that you think your opinion is worthless, You really shouldn't play the relativist position as it shows how ignorant of it you are and indeed how irrelevant it is to the discussion of how jakswan might vote.

I've set out my stall in the OP and have not deviated.
I think the point raised by the OP is very worthwhile and was actually established in 2015 which demonstrated that an electorate that says it is going to vote one way doesn't necessarily.

There is no evidence that Jak is going to vote Labour without Corbyn or can there ever be.
lack of evidence is many atheists reason for being atheist isn't it. Therefore it's a good example. But analogies are not homologies Sane which I think is where your mistake might lie.
Now if Jak expanded then I might shift from a lack of faith in his claim to conviction of it...that's how these things usually work.

[Nearly Sane]

I've set out my stall in the OP and have not deviated.
I think the point raised by the OP is very worthwhile and was actually established in 2015 which demonstrated that an electorate that says it is going to vote one way doesn't necessarily.

There is no evidence that Jak is going to vote Labour without Corbyn or can there ever be.
lack of evidence is many atheists reason for being atheist isn't it. Therefore it's a good example. But analogies are not homologies Sane which I think is where your mistake might lie.
Now if Jak expanded then I might shift from a lack of faith in his claim to conviction of it...that's how these things usually work.

Sorry, you are saying there can be no evidence that jakswan vote Labour without Corbyn, and that if he expanded you might think that was evidence? You need to try and state something that isn't a direct contradiction here.

[Nearly Sane]

I have.

There is no way anyone can demonstrate how Jak would vote in a Corbyn free election. He has come out as not voting labour. Therefore I need more grounds to believe him since in 2015 people who said they were going to vote Labour obviously didn't and I need more data to form my opinion.

That's nothing to do with the question

[Walt Zingmatilder]

Sorry, you are saying there can be no evidence that jakswan vote Labour without Corbyn, and that if he expanded you might think that was evidence? You need to try and state something that isn't a direct contradiction here.

No, Because there is never any direct evidence available how people voted it is a matter of belief with grounds. At the moment i'm afraid people who sound as though they wouldn't vote labour, repeatedly do not then inspire faith when they suddenly declare why they would.
In fact the context is that after the 2015 election it is clear that many won't despite what they say.

We can never prove that someone has voted labour but we can trust that a) a vote was cast and b) it went to labour.

[Walt Zingmatilder]

That's nothing to do with the question

I think it's the best you are going to get.

[Nearly Sane]

No, Because there is never any direct evidence available how people voted it is a matter of belief with grounds. At the moment i'm afraid people who sound as though they wouldn't vote labour, repeatedly do not then inspire faith when they suddenly declare why they would.
In fact the context is that after the 2015 election it is clear that many won't despite what they say.

We can never prove that someone has voted labour but we can trust that a) a vote was cast and b) it went to labour.

this is the problem with you playing at being a relativist.All statements on this including your post here are then worthless

[Nearly Sane]

I think it's the best you are going to get.

OK. I'll just ignore it since it doesn't address the question

[jakswan]

There is and can be no evidence of it. Now that should be good enough for you since it is the basis of your atheism I believe.
I suppose technically Corbyn was not around then and yet People did not vote Labour even as the polls predicted and it is always touch and Go whether people will vote for a Labour that you can almost certainly squeeze a fag paper in the space between them and the Tories.

My votes in last few general elections.

92 - Labour
97 - Labour
01 - Tory
10 - Lib Dem
15- Lib Dem
17 - Tory

Actually joined the Lib-Dems in 15, for the fightback which never happened.

Sadly not on the same page with them on the EU.

I'm very slightly right of centre liberal.

[Nearly Sane]

My votes in last few general elections.

92 - Labour
97 - Labour
01 - Tory
10 - Lib Dem
15- Lib Dem
17 - Tory

Actually joined the Lib-Dems in 15, for the fightback which never happened.

Sadly not on the same page with them on the EU.

I'm very slightly right of centre liberal.

05?