advertisement


Next Labour Leader II

Status
Not open for further replies.
She’s god awful. No chance of winning but just keeps on torching more and more of her reputation.
 
ks.234 said:
In making a very public declaration that it was Corbyn who wanted a faction fight, Lisa Nandy has shown herself to be quite duplicitous and self serving. Even the most ardent Corbyn hater can see that it wasn’t him that wanted the faction fight, it was other factions fighting against him.

Nandy is a clearly a very devious politician for whom personal ambition trumps everything else. She even looks a bit like Jo Swinson
Click to expand...
Here's the full clip:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-51752969

It's worth watching all of it, if you can stomach Laura K's "concern-troll" face. It's clear that Nandy sees both wings of the party as being at fault and, in an earlier clip, this is even more explicit:


At 1:30, Nandy says, "There are a number of people in the Parliamentary Labour Party who never accepted the fact that Jeremy Corbyn had been elected as leader, and that was obvious from day one".

This is completely unambiguous and addresses @Weekender's question about "who started it?". To Nandy's claim, we may add the fact that Blair, Campbell etc. started briefing against Corbyn as soon as it looked like he might become leader, and many senior MPs from the Blair/Brown era refused to serve in Corbyn's shadow cabinet. Corbyn offered an olive branch to the right wing of the Labour Party many times, most notably after the 2016 leadership challenge, when Owen Smith was given a place in the shadow cabinet. There were never any "Stalinist purges" of the sort we witnessed when Boris Johnson became leader of the Conservative Party.

Regarding Nandy, I think she's guilty of the "both sides are as bad as each other" fallacy. I also think she's emphasised the anti-Corbyn rhetoric in here more recent statements about the coup. As a result, she's gone down in my estimation.
 
droodzilla said:
Here's the full clip:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-51752969

It's worth watching all of it, if you can stomach Laura K's "concern-troll" face. It's clear that Nandy sees both wings of the party as being at fault and, in an earlier clip, this is even more explicit:


At 1:30, Nandy says, "There are a number of people in the Parliamentary Labour Party who never accepted the fact that Jeremy Corbyn had been elected as leader, and that was obvious from day one".

This is completely unambiguous and addresses @Weekender's question about "who started it?". To Nandy's claim, we may add the fact that Blair, Campbell etc. started briefing against Corbyn as soon as it looked like he might become leader, and many senior MPs from the Blair/Brown era refused to serve in Corbyn's shadow cabinet. Corbyn offered an olive branch to the right wing of the Labour Party many times, most notably after the 2016 leadership challenge, when Owen Smith was given a place in the shadow cabinet. There were never any "Stalinist purges" of the sort we witnessed when Boris Johnson became leader of the Conservative Party.

Regarding Nandy, I think she's guilty of the "both sides are as bad as each other" fallacy. I also think she's emphasised the anti-Corbyn rhetoric in here more recent statements about the coup. As a result, she's gone down in my estimation.
Click to expand...
Yes, apart from anything else, dragging up past history and bygone battles will not serve the best interests of a party that needs to rebuild. Her own personal interests are obviously above party interests.
 
Brian said:
Trouble is, she is better than L-Bailey.
Click to expand...
Sorry, but I really don't think someone who was on the front line of past battles, and is now trying to reignite the same fight for her own ends, is any anyway good for the party. If she wins I'll be off to the Greens
 
ks.234 said:
Sorry, but I really don't think someone who was on the front line of past battles, and is now trying to reignite the same fight for her own ends, is any anyway good for the party. If she wins I'll be off to the Greens
Click to expand...
I don’t disagree, but unless they are the main competition to the tories in a constituency, I wouldn’t be wasting my vote on the Greens regardless.
 
droodzilla said:
Here's the full clip:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-51752969

It's worth watching all of it, if you can stomach Laura K's "concern-troll" face. It's clear that Nandy sees both wings of the party as being at fault and, in an earlier clip, this is even more explicit:


At 1:30, Nandy says, "There are a number of people in the Parliamentary Labour Party who never accepted the fact that Jeremy Corbyn had been elected as leader, and that was obvious from day one".

This is completely unambiguous and addresses @Weekender's question about "who started it?". To Nandy's claim, we may add the fact that Blair, Campbell etc. started briefing against Corbyn as soon as it looked like he might become leader, and many senior MPs from the Blair/Brown era refused to serve in Corbyn's shadow cabinet. Corbyn offered an olive branch to the right wing of the Labour Party many times, most notably after the 2016 leadership challenge, when Owen Smith was given a place in the shadow cabinet. There were never any "Stalinist purges" of the sort we witnessed when Boris Johnson became leader of the Conservative Party.

Regarding Nandy, I think she's guilty of the "both sides are as bad as each other" fallacy. I also think she's emphasised the anti-Corbyn rhetoric in here more recent statements about the coup. As a result, she's gone down in my estimation.
Click to expand...
Is this news though? The MPs never wanted Corbyn from the outset, we don’t need Nandy to state this. To be fair we’ve had bad mouthing of Corbyn from Rayner also.
 
ks.234 said:
Yes, apart from anything else, dragging up past history and bygone battles will not serve the best interests of a party that needs to rebuild. Her own personal interests are obviously above party interests.
Click to expand...
You are correct but all sides have been guilty of re-waging past battles. On the plus side we are a bit closer to April.
 
Woodface said:
You are correct but all sides have been guilty of re-waging past battles. On the plus side we are a bit coder to April.
Click to expand...

And to think there are another 4 weeks of this bloodletting. The unity of the party is in a fragile state and I don't think it is going to get any better for a long time. The divisions are deep and bitter. The left seem to despise centralist moderates in their own party more than the Tories. I've said before that I'm not even sure that Labour can avoid pulling itself apart before the next election. Kier Starmer will probably win the leadership contest, but I doubt he can hold together the papered-over cracks.

The May elections will provide an insight into where Labour stands with the electorate sans the Brexit problem in the mix. To listen to some there should be a significant revival of the party as it was its indecisive stance on the matter that turned the voters away. I think the results in May will show there was a lot more than the handling of Brexit that voters didn't like.
 
gassor said:
The May elections will provide an insight into where Labour stands with the electorate sans the Brexit problem in the mix. To listen to some there should be a significant revival of the party as it was its indecisive stance on the matter that turned the voters away. I think the results in May will show there was a lot more than the handling of Brexit that voters didn't like.
Click to expand...

Labour will struggle in May. The councils are stronghold of the Right, and they will pay a heavy price for presiding over the Tory cuts, effectively unopposed...
 
gavreid said:
Labour will struggle in May. The councils are stronghold of the Right, and they will pay a heavy price for presiding over the Tory cuts, effectively unopposed...
Click to expand...

Labour will struggle because they didn't oppose Tory cuts, but the Tories will do well??? How strange.
 
gassor said:
Labour will struggle because they didn't oppose Tory cuts, but the Tories will do well??? How strange.
Click to expand...
Lots of people hold Labour councils responsible for the cuts, because they were the ones who implemented them. It’s one of the reasons the Tories were able to present themselves as insurgents, after 10 years in government.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.


advertisement


Back
Top