Forum menu
I was hugely disheartened when Dan turned the leadership down last time. The cons wouldn’t have anything on him.
Starmer would be great IMO, in ‘normal’ times. My fear is all those things above are just weapons to bash him with now.
“He’s a sir! He doesn’t speak for you! He’s a remainer! He defied the will of the people! He’s a tricksy Human Rights PC gone mad lawyer who got x off of y charges!”
Labour will need to have all the rebuttals fully in place and ready to go with whoever they choose.
This is where Starmer could excel, he’s a working class boy done good, to the millions of ‘salt of the earth working class man in the street*’ Corbyn is a posh **** pretending to be ‘of the people’ everyone KNOWS Corbyn was born in a 15 bedroom house, everyone KNOWS he’s worth millions and everyone KNOWS he went to public school and yet here he ia trying to say he knows what’s best for them, even if it’s not what they want. It seems condescending. I don’t know how much money Corbyn has or where he was born or where he went to school, but most people think they do, it’s always in the back of their mind.
You throw those sorts of accusations as Starmer and firstly he won’t rise to them, if he’s got his public speaking skills honed like I think he does he’ll rise above without trying to ignore it, but secondly he can say yes, I am a Sir, I am a QC and I was in charge of the CPS, so I know that people from working class people like me can and should be able to become all those thing and it shouldn’t just be for Bullington boys, that picture of Boris (with CMD) in their sick posh **** club should haunt him, but he ‘owns’ his poshness.
Oh we really are ****ed! Bliar???!! The ****ing saviour??! Really??! Were any of you of voting age at the turn of the century because the general concencus here seems to be that he was some sort of true red lefty labour messiah!
Was he ****!
He was more Tory than the Tories dared to be. So much so, he at least had some sense to call it ‘New Labour’. Yep, right of centre policies with added ego and narcissism. The bloke was and more than likely still is a tosser.
Corbyn noodled himself because he didn’t have the balls to defend his long held views/disgust on the illegal Israeli land stealing of Palestine and he wasn’t a fan of the EU either, so was compromised as labour leader. If he had held onto his beliefs and stood up for them and given the party direction, he may well have been as unsuccessful as he has been, but he would have done so with integrity.
I’m sure the good candidates are there. I like Angela Rayner, but not sure she has broad appeal. No real liking for Rebecca Long-Bailey, and haven’t seen much of Burgon in action.
Burgon?
He's their regular talking head on TV, the best of them, pure left wing talent
He was more Tory than the Tories dared to be. So much so, he at least had some sense to call it ‘New Labour’. Yep, right of centre policies with added ego and narcissism. The bloke was and more than likely still is a tosser.
If Blair doesn’t count then Labour will have gone 50 years without winning a general election. Shouldn’t they just give up?
Oh we really are *! Bliar???!! The * saviour??! Really??! Were any of you of voting age at the turn of the century because the general concencus here seems to be that he was some sort of true red lefty labour messiah!
Was he ****!
I was.
No he wasn’t some true red lefty labour messiah.
He was the Prime Minister.
3 times.
We enjoyed the longest period of unbroken economic growth in history.
We reduced poverty and child poverty.
We sent more young people to University than ever before.
We slashed NHS waiting times.
We banned fox hunting.
We ended the Troubles.
Corbyn was the lefty Labour messiah.
We lost the most important vote in modern U.K. history.
He lost EU elections
He lost 2 GE on the bounce.
The Labour Party fractured and has its worst election results since the 30s
Moderates were told to join the Lib Dem’s, told were we’re just ****ing Tories.
Bercow said yesterday that Politics was a legal blood sport and he’s right, it doesn’t matter what policies or ideas you have they count for less than nothing of you don’t hold power, because your opposition will seek to destroy them to make you look bad.
Anyway, no we don’t want Tony Blair back, but we do want a Labour PM.
We also sold off all of our gold reserves.
Fabricated evidence and misled parliament and the electorate in order to launch military action against someone who wanted to sell oil in Euros rather than USD
He really wasn’t all that.... rose tinted glasses?
As per my last paragraph, what is required is a party leader of any colour who will lead with their principles and above all else, integrity.
As per my last paragraph, what is required is a party leader of any colour who will lead with their principles and above all else, integrity.
Burgon then
We also sold off all of our gold reserves.Fabricated evidence and misled parliament and the electorate in order to launch military action against someone who wanted to sell oil in Euros rather than USD
He really wasn’t all that…. rose tinted glasses?
As per my last paragraph, what is required is a party leader of any colour who will lead with their principles and above all else, integrity.
Another 50 years of Tory rule then. I like the cut of your jib.
**** me, another economics genus who was shouting at the top of their lungs “don’t sell the gold now, even though the price has been flat for years earning us nothing, in a few months there will be a huge terrorist attack and the price will sky rocket” it’s a shame no one heard them at the time.
Lots of people think like above and Labours massive spending plans confirmed said peoples beliefs and played into Tory hands.
I believe Labour should stick with socialist ideas but baby steps! Convince everyone you can be trusteed with the economy first.
Labour over history have borrowed less and paid back more than the Tories FFS, tell every interviewer at every chance.
Is it 40 nominations needed? 203 MPs so potentially 5 candidates. Or have I got it wrong?
Lisa Nandy and Dan Jarvis good shouts, hope they put themselves forward.
Momentum and Mcdonnell were always in charge, it'll be his protege Long-Bailey, he's already said the next leader should be a woman.
We ended the Troubles
Wasn't that all down to Saint Jez?
Anyway, #Burgon4Laeder
#Burgon4ladder
Good news, Comrades!
Reports that Big Richy B isn't ruling out running for the leadership!
Corbyn made it easy for labour voters to vote conservative. Blair made it easy for conservative voters to vote labour. That is all you need to know.
We are a slightly right of centre country. If you can’t appeal to this voting group then opposition or obscurity awaits. Campbell knew this and Blair ran with it.
When Corbyn was elected I vowed not to vote Labour. When Keir is anointed....
I think it's worth reflecting on history before anyone rushes into this....and it's interesting to see that Blair, Brown and Corbyn were all first elected to parliament in the Michael Foot wipeout of 83.
Two leaders and eleven yes, eleven, years later we got to Blair as leader, and then another three years after that we got a Labour Government. Glacial levels of movement. All the machinations and internal struggle, the bitterness and defeats. And the same happened to the Tories too.
Sure, there's a leader in there somewhere, but a PM to be from the current crop? Unlikely i'd say. The taint will last.
In fact I'd go as far as suggesting they aren't even a member of the PLP yet
Tristram Hunt FTW
Please be real.
Please be real.
Please be real.
https://twitter.com/BackBurgon/status/1205550317913432064?s=19
(Probably isn't, but please...!)
Nope, still don't recognise him. You say he was on telly during the election? Perhaps I glazed over a bit. 🙂
I'm sure he's the dynamic, voter-winning force that Labour needs.
Burgonism lolz its not real
I think it’s worth reflecting on history before anyone rushes into this….and it’s interesting to see that Blair, Brown and Corbyn were all first elected to parliament in the Michael Foot wipeout of 83.
During that time they had a left wing hardliner who refused to quit in the face of defeat. He wasn’t afraid to get the handbook out to protect his position either.
Labour should have won in 92, Major wasn’t popular (despite actually being very good) but Kinock was even less popular.
You all need to go and speak to the people who voted Johnson in. It is irrelevant how someone handles the PM at PMQ's most of the voters don't even know what that is.
"Kier who" I can hear them say already. Very serious and dull person who won't attract anyone.
Yes you need good policies and good politicians in the party but the leader needs to just be popular as the polices and abilities of the MPs is largely irrelevant at voting time.
Have you learned nothing from the last election...
“Kier who” I can hear them say already. Very serious and dull person who won’t attract anyone.
Not to mention the person who architected the move to supporting a second ref. If people think leave voters in Doncaster are going to vote for an arch remain London intellectual they're deluded. And that goes for Thornberry too. I can't see past either Rayner or Nandy. Both can speak to northern working class voters at their level without completely turning away everyone else.
It's interesting to note where Johnson's symbolic first visit as PM has been. Blair's former constituency which turned blue on Thursday. He is already trying to position himself across the centreground (and even what might have been described as the centre-left) - to cement these new Conservative voters in place for future elections. Who knows how successful this will be, but it reminds me of how Thatcher turned former Labour strongholds in the south into Tory ones in the 1980s.
Labour can choose not to compete for these voters, but it means the outcome of the next couple of elections is fixed already.
You all need to go and speak to the people who voted Johnson in.
This election was about keeping Corbyn out.
It’s interesting to note where Johnson’s symbolic first visit as PM has been.
Johnson is already out on the campaign trail ready for future elections, just as he was all summer while Corbyn kept a low profile.
I can’t see past either Rayner or Nandy.
Rayner was pushed forward next to Corbyn during this campaign, while others were held back. She may well have helped attract some of the voters you identified, but she also has this election hung around her neck now. If the current play makers at Labour think they have set her up well to be the next Labour leader with the members, I suspect they are right. Ask anyone who chose not to vote Labour what they think of her, and she is now clearly a tainted choice to win them back. If the new leader is seen as a Corbyn continuity leader, then champagne corks will be popping at no10. I really like Rayner… but then I voted Labour. If the new Leader isn’t chosen with an eye to widening support for Labour, and it’s still just about winning a battle inside Labour to keep control of the party, it’s game over for 15 years or more.
Oh, who is acting deputy leader now? Does the role just stay empty for now? Normally they would act as leader during a campaign to elect a new leader. Something for those calling for Corbyn to go soon need to think about… that could get very messy very fast… with no deputy in place.
Tom Watson said something interesting on C4's coverage on Thursday night along the lines of "the Labour Party owes it to the working class to to everything it can to get into power." I took that to mean moving closer to the centre ground and getting into power to implement their policies as and when they could.
edit- I don't think there is a deputy leader, the role was abolished recently.
If the new leader is seen as a Corbyn continuity leader
I bet most have never heard of her, she was only shadow education sec and only joined parliament in 2015 so has relatively clean hands. Truth is we don't really know what her actual policies or beliefs are, but I'm sure she'll come up with something dfferent to 'free everything'. She's clearly extremely passionate about education and social mobility. That'll play very well with the confused and malleable plebs in northern shitholes. She can be the popular public face, backed up with some intellectual rigour from Starmer and Long-Bailey. The problem however is I don't think she'll want it right now.
the role was abolished recently
It wasn’t. But the attempt to do so, to remove the only position other than leader that the membership get to have a say over who fills it, just because the current incumbent wouldn’t tow the line, sent out a clear message to voters. And they listened. The Labour Party isn’t for them, only for those that are left wing enough.
That’ll play very well with the confused and malleable plebs in northern shitholes.
There is no point engaging with you on anything to do with Labour, is there.
Lammy should probably be their next leader. I think they'll go for a woman though. no idea who mind.
There is no point engaging with you on anything to do with Labour, is there.
To be fair, for a while there was the hope that Labour would deliver a genuine left wing (but still mixed economy) leader that would genuinely to his best to improve the quality of life for the vast majority in the U.K.
That hope has just been crushed for years
And the killer blow was dealt by traditional labour voters choosing to facilitate a Conservative vision of a post EU UK
Being a big cheesed off and lashing out is understandable. Especially if there is a renewed effort to drag Labour away from the left. Which seems inevitable at some point.
Starmer in brexitland would be a mistake, unless the wheels come off brexit faster than I expect. He'd be a terrible choice today and could be a fantastic choice in a few years.
TBH there isn't a list of strong candidates. Most of the half decent ones had a crack last time and got their arses kicked by Corbyn, remember. I mean, ffs, Chuka Umunna was one of the great hopes and he couldn't even lead or stay loyal to a party when it was basically just him. If there'd been a good successor to Brown then Miliband wouldn't have been leader and the same's true of Corbyn.
Jess Phillips will get a lot of attention because she was so opposed to Corbyn but that doesn't make you a leader. I reckon she's the "who is most acceptable to the Telegraph" candidate, which isn't a good prize to win, and a false hope- being the one your enemies hate least gets you nowhere because they still won't vote for you. But that's going to have a lot of appeal.
Long-Bailey had a pretty bad election campaign imo, she gets badly hurt by association with corbyn but also for being ineffectually associated with Corbyn. I think she's doomed. Don't know enough about Rayner really, "pragmatically left wing" could be a really strong position to take but you can already see the "loony lefty" attacks being sharpened... Maybe that's inevitable? Don't know. Could be a great unity leader for a couple of years, I can't see her as a strong election leader though. Maybe she'd grow into it.
I'd like to see more of Lammy, he has a good combination of capability and ire. It seems to be more or less forgotten now but half the problem of Miliband was that nobody knew what he believed in, same with Andy Burnham- it's hard to get behind someone when you've no idea what direction they're facing. But he does make stupid mistakes too, and that's more or less the flipside of the things that makes him good, can't really get rid of one without the other. I think he could be a really good option for the party as it tries to get its shit together, but not sure about the next election. Deputy leader?
Main thing, I think, is that whoever it is has to learn from the whole story of the last 7 leaders of Labour- not just be a reaction to Corbyn or throw out the baby with the bathwater, but also remember why Corbyn happened, and why Miliband really failed. And they have to not swallow the big lie of Blair "making the party electable" which is stronger now than ever, but probably will need to be able to use it.
And I hope they don't write off Scotland, it's equally important to remember that the last 2 scottish leaders were absolute incompetents, and that the last decent one was ignored and marginalised by the national party. (Corbyn's faith in SLAB was absolutely ridiculous tbf, it's sort of amazing that they went from Miliband ignoring Lamont, to Corbyn having blind faith in Dugdale) I'm not sure Labour is really capable of learning these 2 lessons right now though, especially as appealing in Scotland opens them to attacks in England.
In conclusion, it's time to dig up and reanimate John Smith.
Labour need to realise its what the general public want that matters and not just about the labour members who keep standing by Corbin for some strange reason.
I can't believe Corbin hasn't resigned yet after being obliterated by a blonde buffoon, he just has to go.
Just get someone charismatic that people can relate to, not overly left and with half decent policies, not an oddball like the last three.
The lovely Rachel Riley did some damage and made Corbin look weak, he has always divided labour voters. A lot of people think he's a weirdy beardy with a wiff of cabbage about him and will just not vote for him. I now live in a Tory run town, first time for about 100 years, doom and gloom.
Not to mention the person who architected the move to supporting a second ref. If people think leave voters in Doncaster are going to vote for an arch remain London intellectual they’re deluded. And that goes for Thornberry too. I can’t see past either Rayner or Nandy. Both can speak to northern working class voters at their level without completely turning away everyone else.
And if you think people in London (which is a huge part of Labours support) are going to vote for Rayner, you're sorely deluded.
She is shit.
Let's not forget that those Northern working class people were happy to vote for the biggest Etonian nipple twister in politics save for the Moggster.
When people were shouting to be rid of Corbyn, (or was it just Binners?), it was not obvious who had the skills needed to take over. Personally I think it would be best to take time to reflect on this election and how to move forward. Everybody seems to have an opinion, and appears confident there’s is the right way - they do all seem to differ from each other however.
I have been impressed with Rebecca Long-Bailey when I’ve heard her speak.
I can’t believe Corbin hasn’t resigned yet after being obliterated by a blonde buffoon, he just has to go.
It's a cult of personality isn't it - the true believers can't accept that it was him despite the overwhelming evidence.
endomick
Member
I can’t believe Corbin hasn’t resigned yet after being obliterated by a blonde buffoon, he just has to go.
Pay a bit more attention, he's already announced he's stepping down and the leadership contest to replace him is already under way.
He's just not making the same damn fool error Miliband did of walking away and leaving a vacuum right at the most critical moment- and it'd be even worse this time as there's no deputy leader. Disorderly handover is how you end up with a Corbyn in the first place.
The structure of our general electoral system (FPTP) and the influence of the press and social media clearly favours personality over policy. Labour have lost the last 4 elections on this basis; however strong their manifestos were Brown, Milliband and Corbyn were just too unpopular with the broader electorate as individuals. If Labour don’t now recognise this and again play the game they did so successfully under Blair they will be in the wilderness for evermore. Progressive policy to improve all our lives and reduce inequality, homelessness and child poverty is much needed but useless without actually being in government.
Disorderly handover is how you end up with a Corbyn in the first place.
From the Guardian article, it's not how many within Labour see it.
Despite the overwhelming evidence, team Corbyn denies completely that it was the leader who repelled voters. Corbyn, when acknowledging Labour’s defeat in the early hours of Friday, refused to accept any personal responsibility for his second general election loss, and said he would stay in office during a “period of reflection”, before stepping down. He, shadow chancellor John McDonnell and party chairman Ian Lavery all insisted Brexit had drowned out Labour’s popular policy agenda, and that the leader had not been the problem. This has infuriated MPs and defeated candidates, who see it as evidence of the Corbynistas’ determination to hold on to the levers of power in order to install a successor in exactly the same mould as Corbyn who will deliver more of the same.
Surely they have only one candidate, and that has to be Diane Abbott, she is a person of the people and speaks for everyone.
taxi25
Member
From the Guardian article, it’s not how many within Labour see it.
That quote doesn't really support your point (or rather, it doesn't contradict mine). And it shows a bit of either paranoia or intentional misrepresentation- Corbyn as outgoing leader has no "levers of power" or ability to install a successor. Corbynistas? Yep, they have influence but that's the same regardless of whether Corbyn quits today and leaves a vaccuum, or caretakers til the leadership election. Only in the vacuum scenario they'd have less constraints.
If Corbyn tried to appoint/install a successor, that'd be the mark of doom. I bet you 20 scottish pence that he doesn't firmly back any candidate, but I'll go double or nothing that if he does, they get crushed.
However... Just saying that it's all down to the leader and his lefter-leaning policies leaves them wide open to making avoidable mistakes next. It's exactly how you end up saying "It wasn't brexit, Corbyn was unelectable" and installing Starmer without worrying about his remain stance.
Just exactly as happened after Miliband, funnily enough, where people kept insisting that it was because he was Too Left Wing when literally all of the party's analysis kept showing that actually it was because nobody knew what Miliband's labour stood for at all, and nobody votes for that. That lead to a bunch of candidates who had the exact same problem, whereas the one dude who actually had an opinion could stand out regardless of what it was. And Blair Made Labour Electable continues to cause them problems.
Basically the next leader can't be chosen on myths, unless they're myths that'll help win an election- but a lot of people will be selective about the lessons of the last few years and will insist that the spin that suits their agenda is the only one that counts. Not just Corbynistas.