The Labour Thread

[Techno Natch]

Decidedly silly to nominate a candidate in hope that he can do a marionette job of appeasing a potentially very large support base of Labour's, and one that has largely been alienated from them for decades.

And also pull In those of us on the left who have never voted Labour before.

I'd be tempted if he was in charge. They alternatives all sound like Tories although Burnham came across well in the last interview I saw.

 

[chairboyexile]

IMHO it's Either go left or stay in opposion fort he 15 years red torys wont win you anything and as for Blair why hasn't he been sent to the Haige as a war criminal yet

 

[Pliny Harris]

And also pull In those of us on the left who have never voted Labour before.

I'd be tempted if he was in charge. They alternatives all sound like Tories although Burnham came across well in the last interview I saw.

Indeed. Labour got my vote this election largely as a tactical gesture in a marginal seat. Doing so was a big compromise to my core values, a bit like a Corbyn leadership would be to the values of the cyborg Blairites trying to steer the ship into the Tory slipstream.

All these protests on how sectors of the electorate are alienated by Corbyn. Welcome to my world. As soon as a true centrist actually stands for Labour leadership I've gone crazy with support for him.

 

[nousername]

I can understand why people dislike Blair, but I wouldn't be too quick to dismiss his opinion on the leadership contest.

By the time the next election rolls round he'll have been the only Labour leader to have won a majority in almost 50 years, and it wasn't won on a Leftist platform.

Corbyn might light a fire under the Labour grass-roots, but is he going to appeal to the floating voters, UKIPers, ex Lib Dem voters? For what it's worth though, I hope he gets the nod. I don't agree with his politics, but he's got an opinion and some principles, and stands out compared to the other bland candidates.

 

[Red]

IMHO it's Either go left or stay in opposion fort he 15 years red torys wont win you anything and as for Blair why hasn't he been sent to the Haige as a war criminal yet

Agree with this. Labour lost a lot of seats to the SNP. If Corbyn was leader I think Labour could re establish itself in Scotland. Despite Corbyn's stance on immigration I think he'd win back some disaffected traditional Labour voters who went over to UKIP.

 

[nousername]

Ed shifted Labour slightly more to the left (correct me if I'm wrong) and lost miserably.

Would strike me as odd if the lesson Labour learnt from their defeat is that they have to go further to the left...

 

[chairboyexile]

You are wrong Ed shifted Labour to the centre ground and then back 30 years

 

[Red]

Ed shifted Labour slightly more to the left (correct me if I'm wrong) and lost miserably.

Would strike me as odd if the lesson Labour learnt from their defeat is that they have to go further to the left...

Regrettably Miliband turned out to be a liability, a man who people felt was not prime minister material. Miliband has gone now. Also, as you said Corbyn stands out and is principled which I think will appeal to some floating voters. What the Tories successfully achieved and what I think ultimately won them the election was their narrative on how labour fucked the economy up. They won't be able to do that next time. I reckon The Scots abandoned labour last time because they weren't left wing enough and some traditional Labour voters were wooed byFarage's plain speaking. Corbyn is straight talking, you know where you are with him. He could get some of those voters back.

 

[.V.]

https://uk.news.yahoo.com/comment/t...for-the-rise-of-jeremy-075437329.html#nWcx93z

 

[Red]

Kendall is refusing to withdraw her candidacy. Supposedly doing so would halt Corbyn's progress. I think it's telling that Kendall, the most right wing and Blairite of the four is in last position at the moment.

 

[BigDaveCUFC]

the biggest thing Labour need to do is take back Scotland from the SNP.

Tory won a majority on the fear factor that they believed voting Labour would hand them a government going cap in hand to Scotland.

The Tories will of course smartly makesure to drive the Scottish to voting SNP to in turn twist the English/Welsh to Conservative

If they claw back the Scots they can claw back the rest, if they don't it'll not matter.....too much fear and loathing of the SNP south of border.

 

[TrinidadsNumberOne]

Very happy that my MP in Manchester, Gerald Kaufman, has voted against the controversial welfare bill.

Jeremy Corbyn has given me a renewed interest in Politics, I consider him to be a gentleman and I agree with a large majority of his policies. I'm yet to vote in an election but should he or someone who has a similar ideology be in charge of the Labour Party, I would strongly consider voting for him. What sickens me is the other three prioritise their appearance to make themselves look good on camera and Cooper and Kendall in particular prioritise the need to make disparaging remarks about Corbyn and how he would apparently take the Labour Party backwards whilst Corbyn appears to be more focused on drumming up support with policies and a failure to make disparaging remarks about his other adversaries and critics.

It's also sad to see the Blairite ideology truly has corrupted a large amount of Labour politicians for good. Blairism to me is in effect three particular things: indvidualism, money and power. He abandoned the true ideology of Labour in order to achieve his power against far from charismatic Conservative opposition and that was why he was such a resounding success, through playing the media rather than being a hero of the British people and their cause like I think he deludes himself to be at times. I found his remarks this week regarding Transplant-gate to be disgustingly absurd, ignorant and ultimately pompous but his legacy is the biggest threat to Corbyn. The sheer absurdity coming from utter scrotes like Chukka Umunna, Tristram Hunt and the like about Corbyn being detrimental to Labour shows how the majority of these Neo-Tories are, in effect, soulless non-entities, continually preaching the alarming rhetoric of Blair, thus making them unfit to represent the Labour Party. It wouldn't surprise me if these power hungry, media obsessed scrotes don't know who Keir Hardie and Ramsay MacDonald actually are and it's embarrassing to see so many Labour politicians patronise Corbyn and the Leftist argument when these were the fundamental principles of the Labour Party in the first place. If the Labour Party were a business, it would be sued for misleading advertisments. This party represents self-indulgent interests, political one-upmanship at every available opportunity despite the fact that they'd do the same thing/something awfully similar as the Tories 99% of the time and the legacy of a horrific human being who had no interest in the true people that elected him, his Sedgefield constituency, when he just walked out of office and Westminster politics abruptly in 2007, thereby abandoning those who had placed trust in them more than anyone else in the country for more than two decades. It does not represent true 'Labour' but we all know that already and that's why we're facing five further years of austerity.

Sadly I don't think Corbyn will win. He'll come close but the second and third choice preferences will kill his hopes I feel and we'll end up with Andy Burnham. A Kendal Mint-Cake has more chance of winning the leadership than Liz Kendall and I don't know many men who would vote for Yvette Cooper apart from Ed Balls, she is a painfully dull woman whose charisma is akin to the monotonous tarmac of the M6. However if Corbyn wins, it'll be very interesting to see what will occur in the next five years, although I'm resigned to never seeing the Labour Party regain its true Leftist agenda ever again.

Ideal world: Labour becomes leftist (and in power) again, the media obsessed neo-Tories within Labour are purged and a certain Anthony Blair finds himself with a one way ticket to The Hague upon publication of the Chilcott Inquiry. But since when has this world been ideal?

 

[smat]

Would be good if, at some point, we could find out what Burnham, Cooper and Kendall actually stand for.

 

[Red]

Very happy that my MP in Manchester, Gerald Kaufman, has voted against the controversial welfare bill.

Jeremy Corbyn has given me a renewed interest in Politics, I consider him to be a gentleman and I agree with a large majority of his policies. I'm yet to vote in an election but should he or someone who has a similar ideology be in charge of the Labour Party, I would strongly consider voting for him. What sickens me is the other three prioritise their appearance to make themselves look good on camera and Cooper and Kendall in particular prioritise the need to make disparaging remarks about Corbyn and how he would apparently take the Labour Party backwards whilst Corbyn appears to be more focused on drumming up support with policies and a failure to make disparaging remarks about his other adversaries and critics.

It's also sad to see the Blairite ideology truly has corrupted a large amount of Labour politicians for good. Blairism to me is in effect three particular things: indvidualism, money and power. He abandoned the true ideology of Labour in order to achieve his power against far from charismatic Conservative opposition and that was why he was such a resounding success, through playing the media rather than being a hero of the British people and their cause like I think he deludes himself to be at times. I found his remarks this week regarding Transplant-gate to be disgustingly absurd, ignorant and ultimately pompous but his legacy is the biggest threat to Corbyn. The sheer absurdity coming from utter scrotes like Chukka Umunna, Tristram Hunt and the like about Corbyn being detrimental to Labour shows how the majority of these Neo-Tories are, in effect, soulless non-entities, continually preaching the alarming rhetoric of Blair, thus making them unfit to represent the Labour Party. It wouldn't surprise me if these power hungry, media obsessed scrotes don't know who Keir Hardie and Ramsay MacDonald actually are and it's embarrassing to see so many Labour politicians patronise Corbyn and the Leftist argument when these were the fundamental principles of the Labour Party in the first place. If the Labour Party were a business, it would be sued for misleading advertisments. This party represents self-indulgent interests, political one-upmanship at every available opportunity despite the fact that they'd do the same thing/something awfully similar as the Tories 99% of the time and the legacy of a horrific human being who had no interest in the true people that elected him, his Sedgefield constituency, when he just walked out of office and Westminster politics abruptly in 2007, thereby abandoning those who had placed trust in them more than anyone else in the country for more than two decades. It does not represent true 'Labour' but we all know that already and that's why we're facing five further years of austerity.

Sadly I don't think Corbyn will win. He'll come close but the second and third choice preferences will kill his hopes I feel and we'll end up with Andy Burnham. A Kendal Mint-Cake has more chance of winning the leadership than Liz Kendall and I don't know many men who would vote for Yvette Cooper apart from Ed Balls, she is a painfully dull woman whose charisma is akin to the monotonous tarmac of the M6. However if Corbyn wins, it'll be very interesting to see what will occur in the next five years, although I'm resigned to never seeing the Labour Party regain its true Leftist agenda ever again.

Ideal world: Labour becomes leftist (and in power) again, the media obsessed neo-Tories within Labour are purged and a certain Anthony Blair finds himself with a one way ticket to The Hague upon publication of the Chilcott Inquiry. But since when has this world been ideal?

Nice one.
Yes Smat, it would. They just keep talking abstract bullshit that is meaningless. Some of Corbyn's support will derive from the fact that he's straight talking.

Kendall says it will be a disaster if Corbyn wins because she thinks it would damage Labour's chance of winning the next election. The alternative is someone like her, a pale imitation of the Tories in charge. Not much of a difference really. We're talking about a woman who didn't have the courage to vote against the welfare cuts. Fuck winning at all costs and adopting a neo liberal approach, we need a genuinely social democratic party in opposition. Sadly I think the spineless Burnham will win

 

[Stevencc]

Would be good if, at some point, we could find out what Burnham, Cooper and Kendall actually stand for.

Burnham spends all of his airtime reminding people that he is from the north, that he is a northern lad and that the place that he was born and raised was, in fact, in the north of England.

 

[Red]

Burnham spends all of his airtime reminding people that he is from the north, that he is a northern lad and that the place that he was born and raised was, in fact, in the north of England.

He obviously believes his being a northerner with a northern accent will endear him to the working class. Abstaining on the welfare cuts vote Is evidently not as important as his northern accent

 

[TrinidadsNumberOne]

Burnham is the worst Scouser in the world. He'd sell the North out without hesitation. Neo-Tory scum as Degsy would say.

 

[Pliny Harris]

Kendall says it will be a disaster if Corbyn wins because she thinks it would damage Labour's chance of winning the next election. The alternative is someone like her, a pale imitation of the Tories in charge. Not much of a difference really. We're talking about a woman who didn't have the courage to vote against the welfare cuts. Fuck winning at all costs and adopting a neo liberal approach, we need a genuinely social democratic party in opposition. Sadly I think the spineless Burnham will win

It's so weird that the Kendall camp are warning of a Labour defeat in 2020 if Corbyn gets in. Like Kendall's landslide 4% share of the votes for leadership will be any different. Can you see PM material in any other candidate if you can't see it in Corbyn? The amount of times people have to qualify mentioning Jeremy Corbyn's name with "he won't get in" makes me think that the Queen should endow him with a new title in the New Year's Honours list so his formal name becomes Jeremy Corbyn HWGI (He Won't Get In), just to spare the confusion.

Then they're whinging about the compromises the party would have to make with a Corbyn leadership and cabinet. As if a huge base of their support hasn't been majorly compromised anyway for the last few decades. Then you get the very bitter tasting insult of "Corbyn doesn't even want to win". If only the arguments against Corbyn would go further than "he won't get in/he won't be popular", so we actually can broaden the debate, which I thought the whole point was for these right-wingers in putting him up for election.

Burnham spends all of his airtime reminding people that he is from the north, that he is a northern lad and that the place that he was born and raised was, in fact, in the north of England.

He's got Paul Morley's vote.

 

[Gashead]

It's very funny, the whole thing.

Will any of the candidates win an election? I'm doubtful as it stands. Aside from Corbyn I've seen no real conviction from any of the other candidates, and I think Corbyn will be torn apart by the media/people won't like his 'image'/people won't understand because he'll want to explain an answer to a question (shock horror!)

The media moans about the 'Westminster bubble', acting as a mouthpiece for Joe public, and yet Labour voters across the country decide they favour an outsider like Corbyn as leader, and their views are totally ignored by Tony Blair who himself has a reputation for being careerist and 'me me me', and the media!! As Pliny Harris says, the Jeremy 'He Won't Get In' Corbyn crap is boring now.

If none of the candidates will win (early but that's my view), I'd rather vote for conviction and principles, hence why I'll be voting for Corbyn for leadership. If nothing else, it might, just might convince the UK and in particular Scotland that Labour haven't forgotten where their principles lie, that seems more important to me currently than some careerist like Kendall trying to win a job in Westminster. Burnham and Cooper are slightly better than her, but again 'on the fence' politicians.

 

[Pliny Harris]

Yet another point of contention for me is how many Labourites and how much of the general public genuinely are enthusiastic about the same old Blair mould? The folk I know who are my age and campaign for the Labour party seem staunchly for it, but I've never seen them articulate why, for example, the railways shouldn't be renationalised, or why Labour should mimic Tory policies such as welfare cuts. Even when I've directly asked them why they believe in xyz, they don't answer. It makes the whole movement seem as secretive as freemasonry. The closest they ever get is saying that "left-wing" policies will be lost on the general public and won't get the votes in. But if so many people refuse to embrace popular progressive ideas with conviction in fear that others won't... does anyone see where I'm going? It's like when I watched the entire first series of Miranda when it was first broadcast because I thought others in my family liked it and wanted to appease them, but it later turned out that each one of us was watching it because we thought someone else liked it and we all in fact fucking hated Miranda.

 

[smat]

Telegraph on Burnham is funny:

“The Westminster bubble is full of people who went to university,” thundered Mr Burnham, MA (Cantab). “People look at us and they see a Westminster elite,” fumed the man who from the age of 24 worked as a researcher for Tessa Jowell before becoming a special adviser to Chris Smith in the Department for Culture.

What a div. Can someone explain to a Westminster-ignoramus like me why he would abstain on the welfare bill vote, even though he has publicly opposed it? Is it just because Harriet Harman said they wouldn't oppose it, and he was happy to go along with what the boss said? It just makes me confused about what he would actually do in government. Has he made it clear anywhere?

I've likewise got no idea what Cooper believes in or what sort of leader she'd be. If it weren't for the particularly shrill Tweeters I follow, I wouldn't know what Kendall stands for either from listening to/reading the news. It's all just mudslinging about why Corbyn can't win (and absolutely no engagement with his ideas whatsoever - just lots of 'bad old days of the 80s' rhetoric). It's utterly patronising to imply that the members considering Corbyn don't know what's good for them, with no positive messages about the other candidates at all. Tell us all why he's wrong. Tell us why Labour members should vote for someone else instead. And be specific.

They are kind of right, though. Imo, despite his appealing policies, Corbyn is a poor candidate for leader because he's a softly spoken 66 year old (who will be 71 by the next election). The electorate won't see him as Prime Minister material and we'll have Conservative rule until 2025. Besides which, if Corbyn becomes leader then half the party has already distanced itself from him and he'll have an impossible job of putting together, and maintaining, coherent opposition for four and a half years anyway.

Let Labour tear itself apart and die. Fuck them.

WE'RE DOOMED.

 

[Alty]

Telegraph on Burnham is funny:

What a div. Can someone explain to a Westminster-ignoramus like me why he would abstain on the welfare bill vote, even though he has publicly opposed it? Is it just because Harriet Harman said they wouldn't oppose it, and he was happy to go along with what the boss said? It just makes me confused about what he would actually do in government. Has he made it clear anywhere?

I've likewise got no idea what Cooper believes in or what sort of leader she'd be. If it weren't for the particularly shrill Tweeters I follow, I wouldn't know what Kendall stands for either from listening to/reading the news. It's all just mudslinging about why Corbyn can't win (and absolutely no engagement with his ideas whatsoever - just lots of 'bad old days of the 80s' rhetoric). It's utterly patronising to imply that the members considering Corbyn don't know what's good for them, with no positive messages about the other candidates at all. Tell us all why he's wrong. Tell us why Labour members should vote for someone else instead. And be specific.

They are kind of right, though. Imo, despite his appealing policies, Corbyn is a poor candidate for leader because he's a softly spoken 66 year old (who will be 71 by the next election). The electorate won't see him as Prime Minister material and we'll have Conservative rule until 2025. Besides which, if Corbyn becomes leader then half the party has already distanced itself from him and he'll have an impossible job of putting together, and maintaining, coherent opposition for four and a half years anyway.

Let Labour tear itself apart and die. Fuck them.

WE'RE DOOMED.

I'm beginning to buy into the Peter Hitchens view (what has happened to me?) more and more. The modern Labour Party is held together only by hatred of the Tories. Nothing else. There's no coherent political message or agreed sense of purpose. It's just a big lump of people who've identified the same enemy.

 

[Gashead]

I'm beginning to buy into the Peter Hitchens view (what has happened to me?) more and more. The modern Labour Party is held together only by hatred of the Tories. Nothing else. There's no coherent political message or agreed sense of purpose. It's just a big lump of people who've identified the same enemy.

Yet the answer for a party 'held together only by a hatred of Tories' is to emulate the Tories? That's what a lot in the Labour party are suggesting, albeit not directly.

Your comment about there being no coherent political message is true though, and if Burnham, Cooper or Kendall are put in charge that will not change in the next 5 years. Too much pissing around on the fence with issues, and even Miliband who tried to shift it back to the left a little bit was brought into line by a party who aren't exactly sure what they want at the moment.

 

[nousername]

I'm beginning to buy into the Peter Hitchens view (what has happened to me?) more and more. The modern Labour Party is held together only by hatred of the Tories. Nothing else. There's no coherent political message or agreed sense of purpose. It's just a big lump of people who've identified the same enemy.

This is (or was...?) the case in Scotland. Labour reminded everyone at the elections that they weren't the Tories and promptly got re-elected.

Now the SNP have successfully taken over that mantle.

 

[TheArtfulDodger]

I'm beginning to buy into the Peter Hitchens view (what has happened to me?) more and more. The modern Labour Party is held together only by hatred of the Tories. Nothing else. There's no coherent political message or agreed sense of purpose. It's just a big lump of people who've identified the same enemy.

Don't agree with this. There's plenty of careerists in among them too, people like Chuck Umunna and the 'Blue Labour' brigade are just sops to the right who just want power. See Umunna's cowardice when faced with the prospect of being challenged for leadership and spouting off from the sidelines now he's out of the battle. I don't think he 'hates the Tories' he sees Labour as a cushy job.

 

[blade1889]

He obviously believes his being a northerner with a northern accent will endear him to the working class. Abstaining on the welfare cuts vote Is evidently not as important as his northern accent

Sadly politics is a popularity contest and people make judgements on first impressions. If 'northern, working class' is a first judgement then for a Labour leader its a big plus, even if their policies dont say so...many will have made their minds up already and be too stubborn to change. A 'working class' UKIP leader (yes, I know he isn't but he's mastered being able to come across as one when compared to other candidates) will still do favourably in many peoples eyes against a 'posh' labour leader, regardless of policies.

As an outsider this labour leadership contest seems to be trying to emulate the general election. A smeer campaign being led against the contestant the media have decided is least fitting of the position. Ironically though I could see that backfiring massively...the staunch labour voters who will vote in the leadership contest will have seen & be annoyed by the GE tactics which IMO may push them against them into actually voting for the person being smeered. The tactics against him so far are part of the reason for his popularity IMO.

 

[Alty]

Link is already in another thread but it's relevant to both: http://www.theguardian.com/politics...ws-fire-position-future-britain-eu-membership

 

[Gashead]

Sadly politics is a popularity contest and people make judgements on first impressions. If 'northern, working class' is a first judgement then for a Labour leader its a big plus, even if their policies dont say so...many will have made their minds up already and be too stubborn to change. A 'working class' UKIP leader (yes, I know he isn't but he's mastered being able to come across as one when compared to other candidates) will still do favourably in many peoples eyes against a 'posh' labour leader, regardless of policies.

As an outsider this labour leadership contest seems to be trying to emulate the general election. A smeer campaign being led against the contestant the media have decided is least fitting of the position. Ironically though I could see that backfiring massively...the staunch labour voters who will vote in the leadership contest will have seen & be annoyed by the GE tactics which IMO may push them against them into actually voting for the person being smeered. The tactics against him so far are part of the reason for his popularity IMO.

Funnily enough, I keep seeing comparisons between Farage and Corbyn. Not politically or personality-wise, but Corbyn is evidently a man of his convictions and dismisses the 'Westminster bubble' (hate that phrase) if he feels it goes against these principles. Those were some of Farage's selling points. The media also dismisses them both as you suggest, and in a sense that makes people want to vote for them more! Will be interesting to see how it all goes for sure.

Farage, working class? We are screwed if people think that. Says a lot about the media's influence when people automatically link northern and working class (as you've said previously, Burnham hasn't really been outside of politics), same said for the connections between working class and UKIP.

 

[blade1889]

Totally agree, Farage was an investment banker ffs but he pulls off being pictured with a pint in the pub which the 'traditional' working class can relate to. He comes across as 'one of us'...and no I'd never vote for him, just know many that did and will!

 

[Gashead]

Totally agree, Farage was an investment banker ffs but he pulls off being pictured with a pint in the pub which the 'traditional' working class can relate to. He comes across as 'one of us'...and no I'd never vote for him, just know many that did and will!

Spot on - Farage was manipulative at times, far more intelligent than his party members in PR terms.