advertisement


Next Labour Leader II

Status
Not open for further replies.
Seanm said:
But that's the actual situation. This is a real puzzle to me. Here we have a situation that is literally all about internal party matters, in which only members can participate, and people keep insisting that none of this is of any interest to any one outside the party, and so we should stop it. I mean it's genuinely odd. I suppose it comes down to the weirdness of political parties in general, which are supposed to represent everyone but which are controlled by members of the club. Long term I'd like that to change, but for now, we've got some internal issues that need to be dealt with: that's not dicking around, it's facing up to the reality of the situation. Anything less is whistling past the graveyard. The candidates either don't recognise this (and so they shouldn't be leader), or realise this but are afraid to discuss their plans with the membership (in which case they shouldn't be leader), or they do have some plans and can talk about them, in which case they should be heard.

My concern is that many members are currently overwhelmed by the defeat and have effectively abdicated their responsibilities: they want to be spectators, and let daddy take care of everything. Enter Starmer.
Click to expand...
This is the exact situation which brought us Corbyn. I personally don't like the system of choosing a leader. If you look at the Tory Party members they are generally bonkers, not representative of actual voters who support the party come election time. They would probably vote in Mogg if they had a freer hand.

Perhaps Labour members being a little passive is not a bad thing in this case?
 
It's interesting that arguments about Labour's internal machinery are still going on. Clive Lewis has some great ideas in terms of the democratic revamping of Labour. However he probably won't get enough votes from Labour MPs to get into the next round of the leadership contest.

How Labour can be improved from the roots upward is obviously very important, but I don't think it will deal with why Labour lost the general election. Working-class Labour northerners went FU to Corbyn and voted for Johnson and the Tories. They did this because Brexit was the major issue and a lot of them are xenophobes and racists.

A similar kind of tension is being played out between Harry, Meghan and The Royal Family. If it isn't worked out and Harry and Meghan are booted into touch, many people will put that down to racism. Being a woman of colour in The Royal Family can't be an easy job.

Marr unexpectedly put this to Brandon Lewis today. The Minister of State for Immigration ignored it.

Jack
 
Woodface said:
This is the exact situation which brought us Corbyn. I personally don't like the system of choosing a leader. If you look at the Tory Party members they are generally bonkers, not representative of actual voters who support the party come election time. They would probably vote in Mogg if they had a freer hand.

Perhaps Labour members being a little passive is not a bad thing in this case?
Click to expand...
What is the exact situation?
 
Woodface said:
Have you actually liked any Labour government?
Click to expand...

It's not a matter of like - I understand the limitations of what can be done if you wed yourself to the Parliamentary process. Parliament is little more than an illusion of democracy that the establishment allows us, on the understanding that they can still get their own way. It inevitably leads to disappointment, that's why I have never been a member.
 
Woodface said:
The members choosing the leader basically.
Click to expand...
Yes, this is what it comes down to, and it was always at the root of the centrist vitriol directed at Corbyn. I think Starmer's channelling strong "Grownup who'll take back control from the members" energy, and policy and strategy are basically an afterthought.
 
Seanm said:
Yes, this is what it comes down to, and it was always at the root of the centrist vitriol directed at Corbyn. I think Starmer's channelling strong "Grownup who'll take back control from the members" energy, and policy and strategy are basically an afterthought.
Click to expand...
I think there was 'vitriol' on all sides to be fair. As I've said before I don't think the ideal candidate currently exists so I believe Starmer is the best option currently. He is perhaps a bit dull but I thought that about Corbyn also.
 
Judging by her performance on Sky this morning, Long-Bailey has been working on her media skills. Better than before. If still not comfortable or natural enough to handle a difficult or unexpected question (she wasn't convincing on Scotland).

So she's probably diligent. Starmer better watch out. He may have a fight if she continues to improve. And Labour better watch out - support for Labour may well drop to historic lows in the polls if she wins.

It was notable that she wouldn't criticise comrade Corbyn by name.
 
notaclue said:
Judging by her performance on Sky this morning, Long-Bailey has been working on her media skills. Better than before. If still not comfortable or natural enough to handle a difficult or unexpected question (she wasn't convincing on Scotland).

So she's probably diligent. Starmer better watch out. He may have a fight if she continues to improve. And Labour better watch out - support for Labour may well drop to historic lows in the polls if she wins.

It was notable that she wouldn't criticise comrade Corbyn by name.
Click to expand...
Neither would Starmer.

Starmer could sew this up tomorrow with two words: "Open selection".
 
Good stuff from Clive Lewis:

https://www.cliveforleader.com/manifesto/

It reflects badly on the PLP that he only has 4 nominations so far - partly, I suspect, because he doesn't fit neatly into any of the current factions. If you're inclined to change that, sign this petition:

https://www.change.org/p/labour-mps...date-for-leader-get-clive-lewis-on-the-ballot

I'm not sure I'll vote for him but he's got some good ideas and I want to hear more.

I'm not dead against Starmer but he's not the silver bullet some people here seem to think he is (e.g. he's the easiest candidate, by far, to tar with the "Remoaner" brush - not good if we want to win back Leave seats).

RLB effed up royally with her 10/10 answer - it guarantees Labour will be beaten with it forever if she wins.

Thornberry has no traction with the "men with ven" we want to persuade, whatever her other merits.

Jess Phillips is too awful to contemplate. Leave-the-party awful.

Time to look again at Nandy?!
 
I like him, but see that he's a fan of PR (as am I) - I can't see the LP being keen on PR, as they do very nicely from FPTP.
 
droodzilla said:
Good stuff from Clive Lewis:

https://www.cliveforleader.com/manifesto/

It reflects badly on the PLP that he only has 4 nominations so far - partly, I suspect, because he doesn't fit neatly into any of the current factions. If you're inclined to change that, sign this petition:

https://www.change.org/p/labour-mps...date-for-leader-get-clive-lewis-on-the-ballot

I'm not sure I'll vote for him but he's got some good ideas and I want to hear more.

I'm not dead against Starmer but he's not the silver bullet some people here seem to think he is (e.g. he's the easiest candidate, by far, to tar with the "Remoaner" brush - not good if we want to win back Leave seats).

RLB effed up royally with her 10/10 answer - it guarantees Labour will be beaten with it forever if she wins.

Thornberry has no traction with the "men with ven" we want to persuade, whatever her other merits.

Jess Phillips is too awful to contemplate. Leave-the-party awful.

Time to look again at Nandy?!
Click to expand...
So agree about Phillips, acts like she's the only women in the world to have kids & a job.
 
notaclue said:
Judging by her performance on Sky this morning, Long-Bailey has been working on her media skills. Better than before. If still not comfortable or natural enough to handle a difficult or unexpected question (she wasn't convincing on Scotland).

So she's probably diligent. Starmer better watch out. He may have a fight if she continues to improve. And Labour better watch out - support for Labour may well drop to historic lows in the polls if she wins.

It was notable that she wouldn't criticise comrade Corbyn by name.
Click to expand...
I thought she was hopeless.
 
doctorf said:
I thought she was hopeless.
Click to expand...

But an improvement on her earlier work. It looks to me as though she is trying to improve her media performances (which is more than we can say for the likes of May or Corbyn). Though you can still see her working out, so to speak, when it comes to appearing naturally relaxed and confident. Ken Clarke she isn't.

Of course, she must also be very ambitious to stand for leader at a relatively young age. And I suspect she has (very) poor levels of self-awareness if she thinks she is competent to run a country. Even San Marino would be (much) too challenging, I fear.
 
jackbarron said:
I quite like Phillips, but have watched Starmer having a go at Johnson and he gives absolutely no quarter to the Tory. He is a lot brighter and can spike Johnson on his unending bullshit and lies.

The fact that he decided while DPP not to prosecute the police who killed Jean Charles de Menezes makes me wary of him though.

Jack
Click to expand...

Oh, that sounds encouraging. Any links to footage of the having a go, or to a transcript or whatever?
 
notaclue said:
But an improvement on her earlier work. It looks to me as though she is trying to improve her media performances (which is more than we can say for the likes of May or Corbyn). Though you can still see her working out, so to speak, when it comes to appearing naturally relaxed and confident. Ken Clarke she isn't.

Of course, she must also be very ambitious to stand for leader at a relatively young age. And I suspect she has (very) poor levels of self-awareness if she thinks she is competent to run a country. Even San Marino would be (much) too challenging, I fear.
Click to expand...

That's part of the problem isn't it - a significant fraction of the population actually think that the PM runs the country
 
The 77 pages on here, neatly demonstrates what an impossible task PLP faces. Necessity of desirability, electability, and appeasement to the party loyal left - all construe to head for a compromise that can never please all, given the polarity of stance.
 
guest said:
The 77 pages on here, neatly demonstrates what an impossible task PLP faces. Necessity of desirability, electability, and appeasement to the party loyal left - all construe to head for a compromise that can never please all, given the polarity of stance.
Click to expand...
All politics involves disagreement and compromise, no need to wax tragical.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.


advertisement


Back
Top