In order of entertainment value.

L Nandy – Brilliant if she is the next Labour leader.
R Bong-Lady – Good fun as she will continue the legacy.
K Starmer – Somewhat interesting because he is looking for a good pension so hang on for 3 terms by lying low.

So the voting for the labour leadership starts today. It’s all very exciting. Only another 12 months, give or take a year or two, and we’ll know who’ll replace Jezza and lead the party into its next two catastrophic election defeats

Brown, Milliband, Corbyn, Corbyn…

Wow time flies

Gone on far too long.

1. Starmer

2. RLB

Rayner for deputy.

Starmer is going to have to be very careful. One thing I’ve discovered over the past few weeks is the level of suspicion of him on the left. If he’s going to have a chance he’s got to gain their trust. He could do that by giving RLB an expanded shadow chancellor job combined with tackling climate change.

Nandy can be in charge of re-educating the reactionary northern idiots. Maybe even a place for Corbyn as party chairman or shadow leader of the house.

Daz, I agree with you for leader, but I’m conflicted over the deputy position – interested to know why you prefer Rayner for deputy over any of the others, if you’d be happy to say on here?

If Rayner was standing for leader I’d be voting for her over Starmer. She’s clearly biding her time, and she’s got plenty of it, but it’s a shame she’s not standing. As for why I’d vote for her, she has something none of the others do, which is a combination of likeability, straight talking, sincerity, and masses of energy. She may be lacking the academic background and grip on policy detail, but with her history and personality she’s the perfect salesperson.

Have any of the labour party members been reading all the bumph you’ve been deluged with over the last couple of weeks? It appears that everybody apart from Richard Burgon has gone out of their way to say absolutely nothing at all. texts and emails land by the dozen. All of them containing a whistling vacuum of nothingness

And what Richard Burgon has had to say is like some random ideas generator channeling the spirit of Leon Trotsky if he’d been transported into the 21st century then fed a bucket-load of acid. Its absolutely unhinged drivel. The fact that he’s a realistic contender for the deputy leader is a terrifying thought. I wouldn’t let him put the bins out, never mind have anything to do with running the country.

Overall Its all dismally uninspiring stuff

Thanks daz, that’s a slightly different angle than if thought of, so it’s helpful, cheers.

Overall Its all dismally uninspiring stuff

Probably because the labour party is a pretty dismal place at the moment. Due largely to the anger generated from the right of the party barely disguising their glee at the election result, and the realisation that the party’s traditional support in northern areas has joined the reactionary fascists a la 1930s germany. Were you expecting tony blair 2.0 to rise from the ashes on a wave of britpop and feelgood PR slogans?

Well, at this point in time, things can only get better.

the party’s traditional support in northern areas has joined the reactionary fascists a la 1930s germany.

The charm offensive to win them back continues, I see.

Overall Its all dismally uninspiring stuff

I find it reassuring. The fact they can’t say anything is pretty strong evidence that anything they could say won’t appeal to members. …and if their real plans won’t appeal to members we can be pretty sure they will appeal to voters. Which is good news.

Just some kind of realistic acknowledgement of what’s just happened would be a start Daz. At the moment it looks like all everyone is offering is more of the same electorally-repellent Corbynite nonsense the voters just delivered such a resounding two fingers too.

It’s a socialist fantasy world they all appear to be living in. Andrew Rawnsley wrote a good piece in the Observer yesterday about the disconnect from reality between the sainted labour Momentum ‘membership’ that are presently being so uninspiringly pandered too and the general electorate (who in your opinion are all nazi’s), using the Corbynite lefts favourite bogeyman (IRAQ!!) as an illustration

Tony Blair and the left’s perverse preference for failure over success

I find it reassuring. The fact they can’t say anything is pretty strong evidence that anything they could say won’t appeal to members. …and if their real plans won’t appeal to members we can be pretty sure they will appeal to voters. Which is good news.

I’m really really hoping that you’re right and that this is the case.

RLB is clearly a truly deluded believer, totally in denial, but I’m hoping Starmer is just going through the motions to get the sixth formers to vote for him, then once in power will beginning the long job to get the party to re-engage with reality and tell them some uncomfortable truths.

I still don’t believe the polls and I still think theres a serious chance that the ‘membership’ are actually daft enough to elect Corbyns anointed one and just finish off the party for good

RLB is clearly a truly deluded believer, totally in denial,

She’s in the Socialist Campaign Group so you’d *think* she was a deluded believer. I just wonder if she’s a careerist who has been saying the right things for the membership to buy herself a lifelong career niche in the party. Maybe she’d sane enough that she had the leadership she’d feel the need to provide a credible manifesto at the next GE. If that tin-foil-hattery was correct it would certainly explain why she was pretty reluctant to stand for leadership this time.

I still don’t believe the polls and I still think theres a serious chance that the ‘membership’ are actually daft enough to elect Corbyns anointed one and just finish off the party for good

I agree with you here. It was clear from day 1 Corbyn’s viewpoint was no an election winner. So members don’t GAF about winning. (The fact Tory’s were joining to support Corbyn would have left them in no doubt.) Given they don’t care about winning why would they want a credible leader now? They don’t know anything now that that they didn’t know back in 2015. I fear, in spite of the polls, it’s gonna be RLB and Burgon.

I thought, as Chairman, Ian Lavery was supposed to be impartial. In fact he’s been campaigning for RLB. Seems a bit freaky.

then once in power will beginning the long job to get the party to re-engage with reality and tell them some uncomfortable truths.

What uncomfortable truths would they be? That we can’t tackle climate change? That we can’t make the rich and corporations pay their taxes? That we can’t afford many of the things that enabled people in the past to escape poverty trap? That we can’t manage public services better than private companies?

I think you’ll be disappointed, because from what I’ve seen Starmer is as much a supporter of these things as Corbyn was. The main difference will be in presentation and execution. If I thought he was going to throw out the policies I wouldn’t be voting for him.

from what I’ve seen Starmer is as much a supporter of these things as Corbyn was

Maybe, but hopefully he understands the electorate aren’t as much a supporter of Corbyn’s Manifesto as he and Corbyn are.

In which case he could win in 2024.

What uncomfortable truths would they be?

The UK electorate will never, ever elect a socialist government. Never.

Everything else is academic as, unless you actually get yourself in power, then you can’t do a thing about any of the other things you’ve mentioned. You can shout about it, wave placards from the sidelines, and sign some online petitions, but without power you are a pointless entity. A simple truth that the left still stubbornly refuses to acknowledge

I worry that you’re right and that Starmer is a believer too. In which case not just the next election, but the next few are already in the bag for the Tory’s

I fear, in spite of the polls, it’s gonna be RLB and Burgon

Burgon is unbelievable. He’s managed the most truly incredible of things. The socialist guff he spouts is so utterly unhinged, he actually makes Corbyn look like a seriously credible politician. The right wing press would have a field day with him, and he’d repel voters even more effectively than grandad.

It goes without saying that the Momentum lot love him

I agree with you completely that they don’t care about being elected, sanctimonious, pious idealogical posturing trumps everything. Its a self-indulgent fantasy world

The UK electorate will never, ever elect a socialist government. Never.

Tend to agree. And not because it wouldn’t be good for them but because they have been brain washed that it would be some evil communist type thing.
If max voting age was 30 they may have a chance (just as Bernie would in the US) but it is not.

A party can still be left wing and it can still look after the people most in need of a government but needs to lose any mention of socialism.

That Rawnsley piece of sycophantic arse licking is hilarious. What he and the Blairites don’t get is that Iraq isn’t just a blemish to be conveniently forgotten for the purposes of electoral opportunism, it’s still a gaping wound which infects everything. You can’t just forget that a labour government caused the deaths of hundreds of thousands of innocent people against the wishes of not just the party but a massive majority of the public. Until Blair and his cronies disappear it will never stop being a problem. The fact that Blair et al still see fit to pronounce on labour affairs without offering any remorse for his actions is the one thing tearing the labour party apart. Without Blair, Corbyn would never have got anywhere near the leadership.

brain washed

It’s not just UK people who don’t fancy Socialism is everyone everywhere. …and it’s not brainwashing, it’s actually experience. Socialism has failed literally everywhere it’s been tried. If it was a rip roaring success somewhere we’d all be clamouring for it.

Until Blair and his cronies disappear it will never stop being a problem.

Blair went 12 years ago! In contrast Corbyn’s and his Socialist Campaign Group pals are hanging on for an eternity and also trying for yet another last chance with Burgon and RLB!

It’s not just UK people who don’t fancy Socialism is everyone everywhere. …and it’s not brainwashing, it’s actually experience. Socialism has failed literally everywhere it’s been tried. If it was a rip roaring success somewhere we’d all be clamouring for it.

It is brainwashing. You need to ask why it would not be successful in the UK and who would not want it to be successful and what they have done over the last 40 years to ensure it is seen as evil rather than something that would actually help the majority of people.

You repeatedly prove Andrew Rawnsley’s point Daz.

I know that you don’t want to acknowledge it, but in the grand scheme of things, Iraq doesn’t even register with voters. In most peoples eyes it’s just part of the collective basket case/shit show that is the middle east.

It’s certainly not something that effects the voting intentions of anyone but a minuscule minority. You can argue the rights and wrongs of it, but the vast majority of voters really don’t give a toss about Iraq, Palestine, Israel, Venezuela, Trans-rights pledges or any of the other stuff that the Corbynite left obsesses and constantly ties itself in knots over. I suppose that makes them nazi’s in your eyes. Maybe they’ve just got more pressing concerns that banging on about a decision taken decades ago that has absolutely zero impact on their lives.

Also: Do you honestly believe that if Blair hadn’t supported Bush’s invasion, that Iraq and the wider middle east would look even remotely different from how it does today? Really? I don’t think it made one iota of difference in the grand scheme of things

Socialism has failed literally everywhere it’s been tried.

What examples are you talking about? The last labour manifesto had plenty socialist inspired policies, but was by no means socialist. Free market capitalism with a few policies to redress the gap. If it was socialist you’d expect things like capital controls, much higher regulation of stock markets and punitive taxes on the rentier economy. Where was all that stuff?

The challenge the new leader will have is getting the message across to the public that they are being lied to by their opponents and the media about their intentions, and presenting them in a way that the public will listen. Sanders seems to have found a formula that works in the US, labour need to do the same.

You can’t just forget that a labour government caused the deaths of hundreds of thousands of innocent people against the wishes of not just the party but a massive majority of the public.

If Blair hadn’t been cosying up to Bush, how many lives would have been spared had the US gone it alone?

hat he and the Blairites don’t get is that Iraq isn’t just a blemish to be conveniently forgotten for the purposes of electoral opportunism

As reprehensible as the Iraq war was, I don’t think the bulk of the electorate actually paid it any attention nor was it their reason for voting Tory.

You need to ask why it would not be successful in the UK

What successful socialist countries are there? By successful, meaning, with comparable living standards and rights and freedoms and quality of life, for your average punter, as the UK has right now (sorry, had before we voted Brexshit).

The last labour manifesto had plenty socialist inspired policies, but was by no means socialist.

Bingo. As said, Labour have to lose the socialist / looney left tags – somehow. It doesn’t particularly matter what the small print of the manifesto is like, 99% of the electorate won’t notice what sort of policies are being put through unless it affects their take home.

Corbyn didn’t even try to avoid the socialist tag. Nor will RLB.

Nandy or Starmer might.

Iraq isn’t just a blemish to be conveniently forgotten for the purposes of electoral opportunism

If I was a member of the party that give us Iraq forgetting it would be *exactly* what I’d want to do.

Iraq’s in the past, elections are about the future. I would deffo vote for any party that had a time machine and could fix past wrongs, but there isn’t one, so we just vote for the party with think will be best in the future.

Sanders seems to have found a formula that works in the US, labour need to do the same.

My cat has got more chance of beating Trump and becoming US president than Bernie Sanders. If its a truism that the UK would never elect a socialist government, in the US saying you’re a socialist is like saying you’re a kiddy fiddler

If Sanders gets the Democratic nomination then the Trump campaign will be one long, non-stop party leading to an absolutely thumping great Republican majority and the biggest orange-faced smirk you’ve ever seen as he attends his second inauguration.

As with Corbyn, you need to worry when you elect a leader and hear the raucous cheers of delight from your main opposition, who clearly can’t believe their luck/your stupidity

Sanders seems to have found a formula that works in the U

er….he hasn’t been elected yet, and I’d be amazed if he is

Iraq’s in the past, elections are about the future.

Quite- Churchill advocated bombing Iraq in the 1920s, I don’t see any tories worrying about that.

You need to ask why it would not be successful

I can’t think of a reason why Socialism doesn’t work a treat. Just like I can’t think of any reason why dicatorships don’t work a treat. You’d think both would work far better than free trade/democracy because they’re organized and planned. …and yet whenever either (or both) are tried they are a monumental cluster****. …and when somewhere that has full on Socialism tries to grow its economy (eg China) the first thing they do is abandon state ownership and then the economy soars.

On a local scale our Council couldn’t run our leisure centre break even. They were gonna close it. As a last gasp effort they farmed it out to a private firm. 2 years later it’s making enough money to stay open *and* to return a profit. I can’t logically exaplin it – someone takes 8pc a year out of it and it still makes enough to survive when it couldn’t under public ownership when it wasn’t expected to make a profit.

If a few countries try Socialism and it goes well people will be happy to try it here, but trying it now when it’s been a disaster everywhere (including here) is a non-starter.

If I was a member of the party that give us Iraq forgetting it would be *exactly* what I’d want to do.

This is exactly my point. Labour members desperately want to move on from it, but they can’t because the main protaganist, and a prominent group of his supporters (of which Rawnsley is one) still think they should be in charge of the party, and still spend a lot of their time telling the membership how they should vote, not to mention actively campaigning against the candidates the membership chooses.

he hasn’t been elected yet, and I’d be amazed if he is

I will be too, but he’s at least found a way to break through to Democratic supporters, and does the populism thing much better than anyone in labour did.

Sanders seems to have found a formula that works in the US

So far he’s lost in every Presidential campaign he’s tried.

he’s at least found a way to break through to Democratic supporters

but only in the same way that Corbyn broke through to get the Labour leadership by getting the support of young, idealistic, committed members (and a fat lot of good that did him)….he hasn’t been tested in the real world yet

anyway, I want to know where all this bumph from candidates that others are getting is..I’ve had nothing!

I will be too, but he’s at least found a way to break through to Democratic supporters, and does the populism thing much better than anyone in labour did.

Well whoop-de-do for that! What a staggering achievement. Can he do it as well as Trump? Once again… whats the ****ing point, if you can’t actually appeal to enough of the electorate to get into power? Bernie Sanders would end up on the receiving end of an electoral humping that would make Corbyn look like a winner.

So all Sanders would ultimately deliver is Trumps smug grin as he begins his second five-year term, in the same way Corbyn gift-wrapped the election for Boris

.. our Council couldn’t run our leisure centre break even…they farmed it out to a private firm. 2 years later it’s making enough money to stay open *and* to return a profit. I can’t logically exaplin it

Close a defined benefit pension scheme, pay minimum wage, increase charges, reduce staff, outsource some services to lowest bidder

second five-year term

Luckily they only have to suffer him for 4 years and then he can’t serve again. Unless he does a Putin!

Close a defined benefit pension scheme, pay minimum wage, increase charges, reduce staff, outsource some services to lowest bidder

Kerley would say “Ahhh, but a state could do all that.”. …and he’d have a point. I really can’t see any reason why a state couldn’t run a business. Yet time and time again we see it can’t.

why a state couldn’t run a business. Yet time and time again we see it can’t

…in the UK. How many UK energy & transport companies are owned by European state owned companies I wonder?

Anyway, getting back to the choice for the next loser of the general election- is this selection process standard fare? It seems to have been going on for ages. What if Labour were in power and their leader stood down would we have to wait so long to get the next leader, hence PM? Given how long it to replace DC then TM this just appears such and endless waste of time.