Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
John Drake

Labour leadership contest

Which of the candidates would make you more likely to vote Labour if they win the leadership?  

55 members have voted

  1. 1. Which of the candidates would make you more likely to vote Labour if they win the leadership?

    • Andy Burnham
      13
    • Yvette Cooper
      13
    • Jeremy Corbyn
      14
    • Liz Kendall
      7
    • I would never vote Labour
      8
  2. 2. Did you vote Labour in the 2015 General Election?

    • Yes
      26
    • No
      29
  3. 3. Do you have a vote in the Labour leadership election?

    • Yes
      11
    • No
      44
  4. 4. Who would you vote for in the Labour leadership election?

    • Andy Burnham
      15
    • Yvette Cooper
      13
    • Jeremy Corbyn
      18
    • Liz Kendall
      9


Recommended Posts

 

Amazing, isn't it, that if the public really thinks all that, we've got a majority Tory government in power. Again.

 

Here's a wider view of public attitudes...

 

Majority support for rail nationalisation – but also policies from the 'radical' right

https://yougov.co.uk/news/2015/08/06/support-radical-left-and-right/

 

This is why it is so hard for any Labour leader to put together a policy platform capable of winning a majority, and why, in my view, although Corbyn's agenda might include some popular stuff that strikes a chord with many, it would still contribute towards driving the party off an electoral cliff if he were leading them.

 

That said, I'm prepared to hear what he has to say, and I'm going to hear him speak in Bradford tomorrow night.


.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

One of the misleading things about polls in this context is that people may support policies individually, policy by policy, but when they are faced with all of them taken together in a single manifesto, they spot the fact that the cost is going to be beyond what they think they can afford.

 

So they vote for the party that promises not to take us into more debt, even if that party subsequently does so.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Amazing, isn't it, that if the public really thinks all that, we've got a majority Tory government in power. Again.

 

Here's a wider view of public attitudes...

 

Majority support for rail nationalisation – but also policies from the 'radical' right

https://yougov.co.uk/news/2015/08/06/support-radical-left-and-right/

 

This is why it is so hard for any Labour leader to put together a policy platform capable of winning a majority, and why, in my view, although Corbyn's agenda might include some popular stuff that strikes a chord with many, it would still contribute towards driving the party off an electoral cliff if he were leading them.

 

That said, I'm prepared to hear what he has to say, and I'm going to hear him speak in Bradford tomorrow night.

 

The chart lower down that page makes interesting reading as to how likely it is that 2015 Tory voters are to switch to Labour.

 

polspectrum.png

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The chart lower down that page makes interesting reading as to how likely it is that 2015 Tory voters are to switch to Labour.

 

polspectrum.png

 

But in 2015 the Tories didn't win at Labour's expense, in fact both main parties increased their vote share.


"it is a well known fact that those people who most want to rule people are, ipso facto, those least suited to do it."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But in 2015 the Tories didn't win at Labour's expense, in fact both main parties increased their vote share.

 

Indeed. The collapse of the Lib Dem vote did not aid Labour in the way many assumed it would (as the Tories won lots of seats from them) and the loss of Labour votes to UKIP was severely underestimated too.

 

Vote shares are not static, and they are not necessarily made up of the same voters.

 

Lots of people switch between various parties these days.

 

It's a dangerous assumption being made by many already that the share Labour achieved under Miliband in 2015 is somehow ringfenced and can only be added to under a new leader.


.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But in 2015 the Tories didn't win at Labour's expense, in fact both main parties increased their vote share.

 

Absolutely, therefore there are no votes to 'get back' and that's why Labour should not focus on switching the 24% of the electorate who voted Tory but the 76% who didn't - those red and grey columns under Lib Dem and UKIP together with engaging those who didn't vote.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Absolutely, therefore there are no votes to 'get back' and that's why Labour should not focus on switching the 24% of the electorate who voted Tory but the 76% who didn't - those red and grey columns under Lib Dem and UKIP together with engaging those who didn't vote.

 

I agree. However the tricky bit is not losing the voters they already have in the process. The danger is that you just swap roughly the same total vote share from one set of people to another, gaining no more seats and therefore no more power in the process. IMO, British people are naturally conservative (with a small 'c') in that they are wary of too much change that happens too quickly. If people see the party shifting too far too quickly leftwards they may be scared off. If elected, JC may find he has some compromising to do so as not to alienate too many of the existing Labour voters. As a perpetual outsider this is something that he has never had to do before, but compromise is part of any leadership role.


"it is a well known fact that those people who most want to rule people are, ipso facto, those least suited to do it."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would want paying to vote for cooper/burnham.

You at least know what your getting with Kendall/Corbyn.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Absolutely, therefore there are no votes to 'get back' and that's why Labour should not focus on switching the 24% of the electorate who voted Tory but the 76% who didn't - those red and grey columns under Lib Dem and UKIP together with engaging those who didn't vote.

 

You're assuming that the Labour party will find it easier to persuade LD and UKIP voters to vote Labour next time than Tory voters.

 

You may be right, but it's a big assumption.

 

You're also assuming that the non-voters, if they can be persuaded to vote, are most likely to vote Labour.

 

But non-voters, it seems to me, may not vote because they are broadly happy with the status quo. So if they did vote they may be more likely to vote for the status quo, which wouldn't be for the opposition.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The chart lower down that page makes interesting reading as to how likely it is that 2015 Tory voters are to switch to Labour.

 

polspectrum.png

Basically then if Corby wins with his left wing views and policies he has little chance of convincing Tory & UKIP voters to switch to him given only 3 & 6 of those supporters consider themselves to have left wing views. Given they had the 1st and 3rd largest share of the votes last time having Corbyn is unlikely to see Labour regain power.


Lets Get Brexit Done !!!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Out of the Labour supporters I know the view seems to be 50-50 between A. Corbyn is amazing but I'd still vote Labour to kick the Tories out if he loses and B. I've voted Labour all my life but will switch to Conservatives or Lib Dems if Corbyn wins

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd consider myself to very much in the 'floating voter' category and cast my vote based on the leader & the parties policies. I have to say I couldn't ever bring myself to vote Labour with Corbyn as leader, I find him to be an odious little man  (not that it matters in St.Helens as they could put a red rosette on a convicted terrorist and a dog tud and they'd still both get elected here)


Lets Get Brexit Done !!!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

corbyn-1.jpg


Ok, so I went to hear Jeremy Corbyn speak in Bradford last night, and very rousing stuff it was. He is a good speaker, very fluent, articulate, done without apparent reference to notes, telling people exactly what they want to hear. And that, for me, is the problem. In my view, he is promising stuff he cannot possibly deliver and raising hopes beyond reasonable expectation. It may well be enough to deliver him the leadership of the Labour Party, but it'll never get him any further than that.

There was lots of stuff from various speakers about how they'd kept their principles, campaigned against Thatcher in the '80s, etc, but little apparent recognition of why Labour spent so long out of office having to protest from the sidelines the last time their brand of politics held sway in the party.

Corbyn also speaks of conducting a campaign based on policy, not personal attacks, which would be fine if his supporters weren't routinely branding those in the Labour Party who don't support him as neocons, Tory-lite or 'viruses' needing to be eliminated. We're either all Labour, or we're not. You can't talk about unity at the same time as allowing this sort of stuff to go on in your name without people doubting your sincerity on the subject.

At the end of the rally, this 'man of the people' was bundled away from the crowd by a bunch of heavies without explanation, despite lots of people wanting to talk to him or grab a picture. That may be down to those who organised the event on his behalf in Bradford, it wouldn't surprise me, but it did leave a bad taste and is at odds with the image being presented. Contrast that with the Andy Burnham event I attended in Leeds, where Burnham stayed behind for ages after his speech, talking to anyone who wanted to have a word with him until the hall was almost empty - and there were as many at the Burnham event as there were at Corbyn's last night too, just to put things into perspective.

I don't doubt Corbyn is a man of principle, who believes in what he says and has a role to play in the party, but my view remains that if he is elected leader Labour will be reduced to a perpetual protest movement rather than a potential party of government. Is that what the people who suffer the most under the Tories really need?

Look, I may be wrong, who knows, and we may well soon have the opportunity to find out for real what will happen to the Labour Party led by Jeremy Corbyn. In some respects, I'm less worried by the prospect than I was before I attended last night's event, because he is an articulate advocate for his beliefs, not quite the pop-eyed, loony-leftie caricature of popular misconception, and he clearly does have the ability to draw many disillusioned people back into politics.

But I just do not believe enough of the British public outside these meetings and outside the newly-joined members of the Labour Party will want to buy the solutions he is selling - more borrowing, higher taxes, unilateral nuclear disarmament - and they are the people he'll need to convince in order to put anything he says into practice.

Having heard all four of the candidates speak in person, I'm sticking with Andy Burnham as the only likely potential Prime Minister in the Labour leadership contest, with Yvette Cooper as second preference.


.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You may be right about it being Bradford rather than Corbyn himself dictating the bundling away, that seems the Daily Mail's view of his Norwich session where there's selfie pics with him.

 

In contrast to many of your points, I see this year as a huge breath of fresh air for Westminster.  Firstly, we get 56 SNP MPs who just want to rip up the convention book where it doesn't make sense or is politically self-serving, everything from taking the official opposition seats when Labour abstained to challenging why they couldn't clap but braying like a donkey kicked in the stones is acceptable.  Now we have Corbyn making the modern Blair/Cameron/Clegg led de-personalisation, evasiveness and focus-group concentration look just like it really is: pathetic.  Ask Corbyn a question and he'll answer it with his views regardless of how it will be interpreted by the self-interested media or focus groups, compare and contrast that to the three other candidates for leader, or any government or shadow cabinet minister for that matter, who will evade the question if they don't have a manicured answer to hand, carefully constructed to target specific demographics or pander to a few media owners' editorial views.

 

So, I have a choice: Vote for Corbyn who is that breath of fresh air or vote for one of the other three who just perpetuate the Westminster traits that go down as well in former mining villages as Tory rosettes.  The only one of the other three that I see having the tiniest chance of beating the Tories is Cooper.  Burnham is far too easy a target for the Kinnock/Miliband (Ed) treatment by the media, he has that air of fragility and evasiveness that's target for the playground bullies who will deliberately misinterpret everything he says.  Kendall is just lost, she should be escorted to the nearest Tory constituency office to see if they can find a good home for her.  Cooper has a bit of steel behind her though and seems especially more confident now that Balls is off the scene.  Even with that said, I just can't see Cooper winning unless Osborne takes the Tory leader job from Cameron, every other potential leader, Boris included, would run rings round her.

 

So, there's a choice, vote for a continuation of the depersonalised, Tory-pandering modern Labour party or vote for Corbyn who might give the party the kick it needs to find a modern voice over the next few years.  Both have a good chance of losing to the Tories again in 2020 but one of them at least gives a glimmer of a different future.  I'll be voting Corbyn.


“Travel is fatal to prejudice, bigotry, and narrow-mindedness, and many of our people need it sorely on these accounts. Broad, wholesome, charitable views of men and things cannot be acquired by vegetating in one little corner of the earth all one's lifetime" - Mark Twain

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The problem is this. Corbyn is the only candidate talking the language of social injustice. Albiet his policies are out of date. While Andy Burnham maybe a candidate of the centre left he comes across as another red 'Tory'.The SNP have achieved what they have through selling nationalism as an address to social injustice. Social injustice such as the lack of real action towards the bankers while the media goes on a crusade against benefit claimants is the perpetual "elephant in the room". Let's be really clear here it will not matter if Andy Burnham is the acceptable face of Labour for the Tory media or Corbyn is a protest campaigner. The reality is none of them are really proposing solutions to social injustices and for that reason they are not really offering a challenge to the Tories.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You may be right about it being Bradford rather than Corbyn himself dictating the bundling away, that seems the Daily Mail's view of his Norwich session where there's selfie pics with him.

 

In contrast to many of your points, I see this year as a huge breath of fresh air for Westminster.  Firstly, we get 56 SNP MPs who just want to rip up the convention book where it doesn't make sense or is politically self-serving, everything from taking the official opposition seats when Labour abstained to challenging why they couldn't clap but braying like a donkey kicked in the stones is acceptable.  Now we have Corbyn making the modern Blair/Cameron/Clegg led de-personalisation, evasiveness and focus-group concentration look just like it really is: pathetic.  Ask Corbyn a question and he'll answer it with his views regardless of how it will be interpreted by the self-interested media or focus groups, compare and contrast that to the three other candidates for leader, or any government or shadow cabinet minister for that matter, who will evade the question if they don't have a manicured answer to hand, carefully constructed to target specific demographics or pander to a few media owners' editorial views.

 

So, I have a choice: Vote for Corbyn who is that breath of fresh air or vote for one of the other three who just perpetuate the Westminster traits that go down as well in former mining villages as Tory rosettes.  The only one of the other three that I see having the tiniest chance of beating the Tories is Cooper.  Burnham is far too easy a target for the Kinnock/Miliband (Ed) treatment by the media, he has that air of fragility and evasiveness that's target for the playground bullies who will deliberately misinterpret everything he says.  Kendall is just lost, she should be escorted to the nearest Tory constituency office to see if they can find a good home for her.  Cooper has a bit of steel behind her though and seems especially more confident now that Balls is off the scene.  Even with that said, I just can't see Cooper winning unless Osborne takes the Tory leader job from Cameron, every other potential leader, Boris included, would run rings round her.

 

So, there's a choice, vote for a continuation of the depersonalised, Tory-pandering modern Labour party or vote for Corbyn who might give the party the kick it needs to find a modern voice over the next few years.  Both have a good chance of losing to the Tories again in 2020 but one of them at least gives a glimmer of a different future.  I'll be voting Corbyn.

 

You say that the media will have an easy target in Burnham. What do you imagine they will make of Corbyn once they get going? :fie:  Labour has just spent five years being hobbled by the media's treatment of Ed Miliband, and Corbyn is much redder (in every sense of the word) meat for them. They're going easy at the moment, precisely because they want to keep their powder dry for later if he wins.

 

Tories will be praying Corbyn wins. Ask yourself why that might be. It isn't because they see him as any kind of threat, that's for sure.

 

I hope those who choose to vote for Corbyn will commit to do more than that if he does win. They'll need to get off their bums, get on the doorstep every weekend between now and May 2020, deliver leaflets by the thousands, take the message personally to voters who will otherwise be bombarded daily by scare stories of ballooning debt, reds under the bed, Britain defenceless, borders opened wide and all the rest.

 

This is the easy bit, the calm before the storm. Trust me, it's gonna be brutal.


.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The difference is that Burnham will squirm and Miliband his way into pandering for the media and tiny 0.1% demographic increases, a true weathercock.  Corbyn will use force of personality to get through.  His policies are scary in some ways but then they're nowhere near as scary as some Tory ones.  I'd vote for a Labour led by Burnham to keep out Tories but I'd do it with a feeling of "least worst option".  I'd vote a Labour led by Corbyn because I know that a shadow cabinet would restrain his most fruit-bat ideas and he really is the social justice champion for Labour.

 

You hope. It would very much depend upon who he chooses to be in his shadow cabinet. 


"it is a well known fact that those people who most want to rule people are, ipso facto, those least suited to do it."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You hope. It would very much depend upon who he chooses to be in his shadow cabinet. 

 

He's said he'll reintroduce elections for the shadow cabinet, so he could end up having to find a job for someone like Liz Kendall, bearing in mind more MPs nominated her for the leadership than nominated Corbyn himself. Awkward.

 

The prospect of a party leader completely out of synch with the shadow cabinet is not a recipe for success, and as a serial rebel of conscience himself over many years, Corbyn would have enormous difficulty demanding loyalty from others to his own programme.


.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You hope. It would very much depend upon who he chooses to be in his shadow cabinet. 

Or more importantly who will serve in his cabinet,Cooper and Kendall have said they would'nt

No doubt many more Blairites MP's would'nt be interested.

Its comical that a party in Britain would select as their leader a man that makes Michael Foot seem like a Capitalist.

As has been mentioned earlier in this thread Labour need their new votes to come from the Liberals,Greens and UKIP voters,this is not going to happen with Jezzer in charge

Tory voters in 2015 certainly aint going to go socialist,so as John M post states this is the

 longest suicide note in history

Go Jezzer

Edited by back to the future

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

corbyn-1.jpg

But I just do not believe enough of the British public outside these meetings and outside the newly-joined members of the Labour Party will want to buy the solutions he is selling - more borrowing, higher taxes, unilateral nuclear disarmament - and they are the people he'll need to convince in order to put anything he says into practice.

 

 

This

Its wonga politics,buy now your kids pay later

I've read he wants to put up the top tax rate to 75%

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This

Its wonga politics,buy now your kids pay later

I've read he wants to put up the top tax rate to 75%

That's back to the 70s when it was around 80%.  Ludicrous.  How to empty our country of businessmen and women to provide people with jobs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This

Its wonga politics,buy now your kids pay later

I've read he wants to put up the top tax rate to 75%

Must be true if you've read it somewhere


"Freedom without socialism is privilege and injustice, socialism without freedom is slavery and brutality" - Mikhail Bakunin

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...