Forum menu
Good riddance
Labour's attitude to anyone vaguely electable. 😉
You mean like last time? Even if they did try that the reality is that you can’t ‘do what you want’ unless you have the mandate and the time to get results from the policies. Most labour policies will take more than one term, some more than two. If they don’t have the voters behind the policies you simply can’t implement them.
The big difference is that the executive now has more or less un-fettered power and that's due to get worse after the exit bill legislation is enacted. There's a huge swathe of Henry VIII style prerogative been allowed. Do what's necessary and then repeal those powers.
Labour’s attitude to anyone vaguely electable.
I said just after the election that the right of the party had sown the seeds of their own defeat due to their actions in the preceding 4 years and now we see the result. Phillips thought she could just waltz in with her media profile and clean up, but she didn't consider that she'd need a good portion of the grassroots behind her to get on the ballot. She wouldn't have got on the ballot even by playing a blinder against the other candidates, but the reality is that she has been extremely mediocre.
Never had any time for Jess and almost laughed at the weekend when she said a great token gesture would be for KS to stand aside for a female leader. That's literally all she had
Philips had to impress at hustings to win over a big union… she hasn’t, and she didn’t. Only two candidates had union backing sewn up from the start… all the others have to earn it. She hasn’t. The members probably would have avoided her like the plague anyway, but it’s immaterial now… no big union backing means members can’t vote for her anyway.
A timely reminder that a very large proportion of the population do not want a few big unions having a veto over who can be PM… so having a system that means that any Labour leader must have a big union publicly backing them tars that leader from the offset… whoever wins this race has their first albatross hung around their neck before they even seek the backing of party members.
A candidate doesn't need Union backing to get on the final ballot.
The more I see Starmer the less I like him. Thought I'd check things I'm interested in:
Voted for and against EU citizens' rights to stay in the UK
https://www.theyworkforyou.com/mp/25353/keir_starmer/holborn_and_st_pancras/divisions?policy=6764
Changed his mind on Europe and voted to empower the Tories to leave:
https://www.theyworkforyou.com/mp/25353/keir_starmer/holborn_and_st_pancras/divisions?policy=6761
Voted against an investigation into the Iraq war having argued it was illegal before the war
(Guardian articel 2003)
I don't have a vote but if I had he wouldn't get it. In fact without Jess in the race I'm struggling to find the candidate I dislike least. Not good for a center-left voter.
A candidate doesn’t need Union backing to get on the final ballot.
If a candidate gets on the final ballet without the backing of a big union… then you can say that.
I’ve read the rules, and you are right, union backing in not necessary by the letter of the rules, but they are written so that, in practice, you absolutely do need the backing of a big union to get on the ballot. Without the backing of a big union, you have no real chance of becoming leader of the Labour Party. New rules… but it still looks like the same old union control to voters who are shy of the power of union leaders.
It won’t be Jo Swinson’s Lib Dems, although it might be someone else’s.
Any other contenders?
I think things will have to get even worse for the non-Tories before there's a fresh approach.
It's not a change that can happen in a single government term, it'll be a multi-generational thing, I mean look at UKIP [spits on the ground] they're the most 'exciting' thing to happen to UK politics in decades, but it took them 25 years and a LOT of backers to got where they got, but they share the fate of lots of other start-up parties, as soon as they start making real noise, one of the big parties will evolve to take a few of their policies as their own and they'll cease to exist.
Well labour folks we need a half decent horse with four legs two eyes and can run in a straight line, to be frank whining that Kier Starmers not quite right when the rest of the line up can barely muster four legs between then is procrastination at best.
He is the only viable option to get Labour heading back to power, its not a choice its simply all there currently is.
I think things will have to get even worse for the non-Tories before there’s a fresh approach.
Labour have to lose the next General Election before there is a ‘non-Tory’ approach of any kind emerging. Sadly for the UK. Some of the other parties tried some joint “stop the Tories” stuff this time, but it’s all pointless while Labour feel they are just ‘one more push’ away from getting a majority in the commons on their own. Where they keep getting the impression that’s the case is anyone’s case. I blame Blair.
one of the big parties will evolve to take a few of their policies as their own and they’ll cease to exist
[ Greens in England are about to experience that - or you could argue they have already ]
I mean look at UKIP [spits on the ground] they’re the most ‘exciting’ thing to happen to UK politics in decades, but it took them 25 years and a LOT of backers to got where they got, but they share the fate of lots of other start-up parties
Well yes, exactly, UKIP were always dead as soon as a mainstream took on Brexit. But "their purpose" is done now, anyway, a single issue protest party (I'm being generous) can't survive when they get what they want.
people in the party don’t have a much time for her due to her spending the last few years promoting herself by trashing the party and it’s leadership. Good riddance.
But people outside the party seem to like her a lot and labour not listening to the people was the reason they got creamed in the last GE. Also, she may have been trashing the party and it's leadership, but for good reason, the party was directionless and the leadership poor.
She's intelligent, NOT from London and has some good ideas. Hopefully we'll see more of her in the future.
@Dazh. Agreed. Why anyone ever thought she was leader material is beyond me.
She probably realised it's a more tricky job than just warbling on telly or having a photo-shoot.
Also, she may have been trashing the party and it’s leadership, but for good reason,
Good for her publisher, I'm sure. I've far more time for Starmer, who rolled up his sleeves and got on with the job.
But people outside the party seem to like her a lot and labour not listening to the people was the reason they got creamed in the last GE
The people listened to Boris Johnson ... Is that the archetype we need to win?
Johnson was disloyal towards his party leadership, that has helped him. If loyalty to the party is put to the fore, it may contradict with the qualities needed to win over the public. But that’s the core dilemma the other candidates are left with… Nandy, Phillips, Lewis and Thornberry have all made pitches with an eye to beating Johnson, including changing the party to try and make it more electable… which rules them all out… Starmer and Long-Bailey are playing to the party faithful, they have to. It’s about “uniting the party”, or “saving the project’. Only after one of them is leader will either if those put their cards on the table about how to win over the voters (or, I fear, don’t).
Anyone who saw the hustings couldn't think Phillips would make a good leader. She seemed out of her depth and downbeat when the party, and I think the country, is looking for inspiring leadership. She even wrote an article attempting to explain why she was "awful" (her self description). Her criticism of the hustings format may be legitimate but it's exactly the format that gets coverage in PMQs, election debates and used in media interviews.
Thornberry on the other hand was the opposite - feisty, funny and generally sounding like a leader. Nandy was pretty good too. Neither have much chance as the competition has always been a run off between RLB an Starmer.
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2020/jan/19/hustings-labour-leader-jess-phillips
Phillips was awful at hustings, Thornberry shined, Nandy had clearly thought it all through. Starmer and Long-Bailey came across as wanting to manage the party… not outward facing at all… but, again, that’s what they have to do right now.
Shone!
Starmer needs a voice coach.
Shone!
Apologies.
Starmer needs a voice coach.
He needs a different personality. He’d be a great PM in my opinion… but he’s not shown even a hint of what it takes to become one in this messed up age.
Good focus group on Channel 4 news last night covering Labour leader candidates. A room full of average 'working class' voters who had switched to Tory
Nandy came out top, Starmer and Long Bailey came out bottom. Starmer was seen as dull and corporate (just as I have been saying) can't remember what they said about Long Bailey but wasn't good either.
Interestingly Nandy was the person none of them recognised whereas they all recognised Starmer.
They were then told that Starmer and RLB were favourites and they all laughed.
If Labour want a chance with the public they need to go with focus groups rather than internal elections. They should have at least learnt that from last few years...
OTOH, guardian survey put Starmer at the top.
If Labour want a chance with the public they need to go with focus groups rather than internal elections. They should have at least learnt that from last few years
A room full of Tory voters get to select the Labour leader?
I think Phillips is right to be downbeat, they are collectively in the crap with little hope of climbing out.
Labour are still pandering to Momentum and the Unions rather than the great unwashed who need to elect them.
No - the focus groups tell them what's happening outside the party. I'd choose Nandy precisely for the reasons C4 pointed out. RLB would be pummelled by the press and I'm not sure Thornberry would connect with enough of the UK
A room full of Tory voters get to select the Labour leader?
Not quite. A room full of ex labour voters (until the last election), i.e the ones Labour need to appeal to again.
And clearly they would need to be 1,000 of focus group sessions with different types of voters.
I would be absolutely amazed if many of the focus groups came out with RLB as the leader they would support but don't let that stop the labour party members electing her.
I don't want Starmer to get the leadership this time around as I think it would be a waste. Everything, even something as patently unpopular and insular as Corbynism, will need to be tried out under another leader just to be sure it really wasn't Grandpa that was the problem.
Let RLB have it this time, really show the nonsense for what it is, then get the grownups in.
Everything, even something as patently unpopular and insular as Corbynism, will need to be tried out under another leader just to be sure it really wasn’t Grandpa that was the problem.
God, no.
Bury it at midnight, at a crossroads, in a lead coffin with a stake through it's heart.
Labour should learn and move forward, not spin on it's willy and expect the world to come to it, just to prove what is clear and without doubt to all.
That would leave the UK in the grip of BoJo for 10+ years
God, no.
What I meant was that the sixth formers won't take the election defeat for an answer. It will have to be repeated under another leader for them to be shown up and have to accept it. We are talking about loss of face for people who pride themselves on ideological purity here!
With any luck it wouldn't necessarily take another GE defeat to actually precipitate the change.
I fear that is exactly what it’ll take.
I don’t want Starmer to get the leadership this time around as I think it would be a waste. Everything, even something as patently unpopular and insular as Corbynism, will need to be tried out under another leader just to be sure it really wasn’t Grandpa that was the problem.
Let RLB have it this time, really show the nonsense for what it is, then get the grownups in.
I sort of agree, the problem is that Labour leaders (in fact all leaders) have a habit of keeping power with a vice-like grip, without giving a single shit about how it affects the party's chances. Especially with a fanatical following like Momentum bestow on their chosen Comrades. Short of being found with a dead prostitute, or dying they'll not be shifted without a big GE loss. I don't fancy RLB having 5 years as LotO with her odd mix of Socialist and religious zealot leanings.
It will have to be repeated under another leader for them to be shown up and have to accept it.
You would have thought that one Milliband and two Corbyn GE defeats would be enough so that a win in the next decade would be 'a good thing'
You would have thought that one Milliband and two Corbyn GE defeats would be enough so that a win in the next decade would be ‘a good thing’
Yes, you would.
But we are talking about Momentum here.
"It is not us that is the problem. No, it is the electorate that must change".
Nandy has just made the final stage. With preference voting I think members etc will take a punt on Nandy with the understanding that it is how they order Starmer and RLB down the ballot that will matter.
I still don't think Nandy will win but a good showing will give her a v senior position in a Starmer cabinet if he's got any sense
Y'all do realise that Momentum make up less than 10% of all Labour members?
Y’all do realise that Momentum make up less than 10% of all Labour members?
I think they're more comforted with the fictitious idea that the labour party is controlled by an all-powerful marxist cabal with Che Guevara t-shirts. Even if that were true, it wouldn't be momentum as they're an entirely different group from the old trots and commies from the 70s and 80s.
Y’all do realise that Momentum make up less than 10% of all Labour members?
Y'all do realise that the ERG is also a small cabal within the Tories, yet they have got them dancing to their tune too.
Albeit with a neo fascist party to the side to increase their pressure, but I am sure you get the picture.
Y’all do realise that the ERG is also a small cabal within the Tories, yet they have got them dancing to their tune too.
That silly analogy comes up time and time again.
The ERG are elected MPs with absolute influence and voting power in Parliament.
Is/was Laura Parker the equivalent of Jacob Rees-Mogg?
No I don't think so either.
If the world goes to shit because of climate change and unfettered capitalism I couldn’t really give a **** who the government is, it’s the same result. This year carbon concentrations reached 415ppm. The last time it was that high the world was 3.5c hotter, and they’re still rising. At that temperature the Amazon will be gone, the oceans dead and the ice caps irreversably melting. It’s ok though cos we could have a nice labour government dishing out a bit more money to the poor and telling everyone to recycle more.
Shouldn't you be voting Green?
Seriously.
And yes, I know, FPTP, but the Labour Party is never going to be the Green Party, even if it ought to be.
edhornby
...I’d choose Nandy precisely for the reasons C4 pointed out....
Shouldn't Nandy be disqualified for her enthusiasm for using state violence on voters? ie her endorsement of the Spanish police attacking and badly beating Catalonians at the polling booths.
She's a Nazi, not Labour at all.
‘We should seek to discover the lessons from when, in brief moments in history in places like Catalonia and Quebec, we have managed to go and beat narrow, divisive nationalism with a social justice agenda.’
No mention of endorsing police brutality.
You can only stop Scotland breaking away by the UK government and the rest of the UK State acting and working for the people that live in Scotland, you won’t do so with police action of any kind.
No one on either side of the Scottish Indie debate should be drawing any parallels with Catalonia, really. Not wise.
Shouldn’t you be voting Green?
In pretty much every election where my vote hasn't mattered, I've voted green. I live in a lab-tory marginal though so as you say, FPTP dictates my vote. My politics are much more aligned with the Green Party than labour. That being said though, labour have come a long way on green policies and I think they now understand the scale of the challenge and are moving rapidly towards policies which properly address climate change and sustainability so I'll keep voting for them on that basis.
In pretty much every election where my vote hasn’t mattered, I’ve voted green.
Can anyone spot an issue with that?