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

If Corbyn wins the leadership contest will we be adding the Labour party to the Obituary thread ?

No, I don't think so.  I think it'll lead to a purging though.  Much as Kinnock had the nightmare task of cleaning up after Foot, whoever takes over after Corbyn will have to do the same.  What Kinnock did well was help the party focus on what it really wanted to do then force out the unreconstructed far-left types who didn't fit that image.

 

The Labour party really does need to be reinvented though as right now it's about as useless as a chocolate fireguard.  For example, the entire Parliamentary Party allows itself to get beaten up over being business unfriendly despite sucking up to business so far that they said they'd extend the Coalition's corporate tax cuts even further.  Not a single challenge from Labour that the Tories are actually persistently punishing small businesses by removing all the small company tax breaks while passing on that money to the largest companies.  All it is from Labour is sucking up even further to businesses by effectively bending over anytime any CEO from a FTSE 250 company meets them.

 

I think a Corbyn leadership will change a lot.  It'll break things but then it'll help Labour set a few core policies as well, for example it'll force attention on fixing the House of Lords constitutional debacle where the Prime Minister can just beat the system by appointing more of their own Lords.  It'll also give the republican cause its first voice in generations with someone who wouldn't willingly go cap in hand to the Queen to get her permission to govern if the electorate voted him in.  Then there's all the other issues that he champions.

 

Will it break Labour?  Yes, undoubtedly.  The right-wing side of the Labour party conveniently fail to recognise that the left-wingers have stood by loyally for a number of Parliaments now while Labour lurches to the right, it's their turn to suck it up rather than throw their toys out like Danczuk threatens.


“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 Labour leadership debate in a nutshell.  One candidate giving strong opinions, albeit some that some people really don't like, the other three preaching the need for change but then telling us nothing other than 'vote for me for change!"

 

Cooper has spent so much time in the Labour camp of the last couple of decades that she really has no clue how to say what she really thinks.  (and here's a warning about me defending Blair for those who tend to get high blood pressure over that concept)  What she (and Burnham and Kendall) fail to realise that in 1997, Blair won by being hugely aggressive and positive over what they'd do in power.  I knew exactly what I was getting in 1997 and Blair delivered it, he not only promised clearly and specifically right against the Tory press briefing but he got the message right that hope comes from delivering change to the people, he won a massive landslide based on that message.

 

Right now, promise to increase the lot of the people of Britain and it's scorned as unaffordable sunshine day thinking while if you fail to promise yet more tax cuts for the big businesses you're ridiculed as anti-business.  That needs a strong leader willing to challenge the status quo from the position of the massed people of Britain rather than pandering to the tiny, and overwhelmingly rich, few.


“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

Anyone but Corbyn....

 

What she (and Burnham and Kendall) fail to realise that in 1997, Blair won by being hugely aggressive and positive over what they'd do in power.  I knew exactly what I was getting in 1997 and Blair delivered it, he not only promised clearly and specifically right against the Tory press briefing but he got the message right that hope comes from delivering change to the people, he won a massive landslide based on that message.

 

Compare the 5 pledges from 1997 to this year.  Blairs pledges were clear about what they would be doing, with numbers.  The 5 (then 6...) pledges this year were all aspirations, we will do better, etc.


With the best, thats a good bit of PR, though I would say the Bedford team, theres, like, you know, 13 blokes who can get together at the weekend to have a game together, which doesnt point to expansion of the game. Point, yeah go on!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Anyone but Corbyn....

 

 

Compare the 5 pledges from 1997 to this year.  Blairs pledges were clear about what they would be doing, with numbers.  The 5 (then 6...) pledges this year were all aspirations, we will do better, etc.

You can see from this handy fact-check from when Channel 4 did proper news stuff that 1997 was the high water for clear promises, 2001 was quite good as well but 2005 was when it started to get all vague and waffly, unfortunately that's been the case ever since.  Ed's "set in stone" debacle was stuff that just wasn't measurable objectively, get two random people from the street in a room and they wouldn't be able to agree what any of them meant.


“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

Don't worry, Gordon is being brought out to do some speaking at the weekend.

 

Looks like Channel 4 news got ahead of themselves.  Gordon is back in the cage.

 

He's back out of the box on Sunday... talking about - "the future of the Labour Party"


With the best, thats a good bit of PR, though I would say the Bedford team, theres, like, you know, 13 blokes who can get together at the weekend to have a game together, which doesnt point to expansion of the game. Point, yeah go on!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The truth about the Labour leadership contest is that when you put aside his policies Jeremy Corbyn is the only candidate who has actually looked, sounded and behaved like a leader.

 

Andy Burnham may be a nice bloke, but for the most part he has sounded too timid and anxious not to upset anyone.

 

Yvette Cooper has only in the last day or so actually sounded as though she has something important to say, and by now it's too late.

 

In that sense a leadership campaign is as useful for showing who shouldn't be a leader as much as showing who should be.

 

Corbyn now looks certain to win.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If Burnham or Cooper had come out at the start with some mildly lefty policies, and actually said what they would do (details not aspirations), they would probably be in the lead.

 

The wishy washy response to the budget was a crucial period, and they failed to show up.


With the best, thats a good bit of PR, though I would say the Bedford team, theres, like, you know, 13 blokes who can get together at the weekend to have a game together, which doesnt point to expansion of the game. Point, yeah go on!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If Burnham or Cooper had come out at the start with some mildly lefty policies, and actually said what they would do (details not aspirations), they would probably be in the lead.

 

The wishy washy response to the budget was a crucial period, and they failed to show up.

For that you can thank Harriet Harman. She completely screwed Burnham and Cooper.


"Just as we had been Cathars, we were treizistes, men apart."

Jean Roque, Calendrier-revue du Racing-Club Albigeois, 1958-1959

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

on the radio tonight it was confirmed that Corbyn is sedning out recordings of his speeches....on tape cassettes.


Four legs good - two legs bad

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When you look at what Labour and the Cons have done to the UK it makes one wonder why anyone would consider voting for either.Obviously some of you guys  don't worry about the consequences for your families.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When you look at what Labour and the Cons have done to the UK it makes one wonder why anyone would consider voting for either.Obviously some of you guys  don't worry about the consequences for your families.

OI! Trojan does the jokes.


Four legs good - two legs bad

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When you look at what Labour and the Cons have done to the UK it makes one wonder why anyone would consider voting for either.Obviously some of you guys don't worry about the consequences for your families.

And what great party do you support? And what have they achieved over the years to improve people's lives? (I think I can guess, and if I'm right it's a cult that never has and never will achieve anything).


"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

As far as support goes there isn't much choice,but,supporting the two i mentioned has stuffed the country, but eh,if your happy with it no problem.I'm well out of it.

 

And what great party do you support? And what have they achieved over the years to improve people's lives? (I think I can guess, and if I'm right it's a cult that never has and never will achieve anything).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As far as support goes there isn't much choice,but,supporting the two i mentioned has stuffed the country, but eh,if your happy with it no problem.I'm well out of it.

it usually me that goes off topic but this is about the election of a Labour leader. if you want to explore the overall state of the country, why not start a new topic?


Four legs good - two legs bad

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Corbyn's Northern Future (PDF).  Created by asking every registered Labour Party supporter in the north what they wanted rather than focus group.


“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

I think we're all being a bit previous.  No votes have been cast so far.  it may look like a done deal for JC but there's many a slip etc.  Personally I'd prefer Yvette Cooper. TBH I reckon given the chance she'd destroy Cameron at PMQ's.   Miliband's problem was that he didn't really have the support of all his MP's, I reckon if Yvette wins she will have that support.  Specific policies don't matter at the moment, what matters is general direction and getting the Tories on the back foot.  Something Miliband achieved rarely and only regularly towards the end of the Parliament when it was too late.  With unemployment on the increase, Labour need someone to nail Cameron as soon as possible.  


“Few thought him even a starter.There were many who thought themselves smarter. But he ended PM, CH and OM. An Earl and a Knight of the Garter.”

Clement Attlee.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think we're all being a bit previous.  No votes have been cast so far.  it may look like a done deal for JC but there's many a slip etc.  Personally I'd prefer Yvette Cooper. TBH I reckon given the chance she'd destroy Cameron at PMQ's.   Miliband's problem was that he didn't really have the support of all his MP's, I reckon if Yvette wins she will have that support.  Specific policies don't matter at the moment, what matters is general direction and getting the Tories on the back foot.  Something Miliband achieved rarely and only regularly towards the end of the Parliament when it was too late.  With unemployment on the increase, Labour need someone to nail Cameron as soon as possible.  

See, that's the thing... Cooper is probably the only one who can nail Cameron effectively but she just doesn't stand for anything.  I can see her being a hugely effective leader of the opposition but I'd worry if she were PM because I think she'd bend and sway at every shadily-funded focus group's findings.  She wouldn't want to go further right but would do it in the hunt for that elusive bit of good PR from the editorial columns.

 

The more I see of Burnham, the more I think that he'd be an even less effective version of Ed Miliband.


“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

See, that's the thing... Cooper is probably the only one who can nail Cameron effectively but she just doesn't stand for anything.  I can see her being a hugely effective leader of the opposition but I'd worry if she were PM because I think she'd bend and sway at every shadily-funded focus group's findings.  She wouldn't want to go further right but would do it in the hunt for that elusive bit of good PR from the editorial columns.

 

The more I see of Burnham, the more I think that he'd be an even less effective version of Ed Miliband.

 

I think that's a fair assessment of both Burnham and Cooper.  And I do still wonder if Liz Kendall is in the Labour party because she is the ultimate shy Tory.


Build a man a fire, and he'll be warm for a day. Set a man on fire, and he'll be warm for the rest of his life. (Terry Pratchett)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think that's a fair assessment of both Burnham and Cooper. And I do still wonder if Liz Kendall is in the Labour party because she is the ultimate shy Tory.

I just met her today and she caught me of guard with how pleasant and ordinary she comes across. I'm still edging towards Burnham or Cooper, but to me Kendall comes across more Lib Dem than Tory with focus on things like education in poorer areas.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

According to the Guardian, "Separately it emerged that Corbyn wrote in a column for the Morning Star in March that he believed Labour’s 1983 manifesto – dubbed the longest suicide note in history – would be “highly appropriate today to deal with the finance and banking crisis that has been visited upon the poorest people in Britain and, indeed, across Europe”."

Edited by JohnM

Four legs good - two legs bad

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...