[Politics] Next leader of the Labour party

[Weststander]

Good luck with that. Let us know how you get on.

A UK marxist revolution, dreamed up in an Irish Republic study. Frustrated that the overseas electorate heavily rejected Marxist Corbyn and McCluskey, so now hoping for civil disobedience and an uprising.

It will never happen. The UK is inherently a conservative nation. For every angry 19 year old donning a Yasmin Arafat keffiyeh, slyly vandalising the possessions of others, statues or attacking the police, there are many fold who condemn that, oppose that and will see that they fail.

The quiet majority of Brits don’t take to fellow Brits not liking this country, talking it down, only finding negatives. Migrants at Sangatte haven’t heard that message, they like the positives, they seek escape to the overt and institutional racism in Italy, the Balkans and elsewhere. The UK is not half as bad as miserablists would have us believe.

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

Good luck with that. Let us know how you get on.

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

A UK marxist revolution, dreamed up in an Irish Republic study. Frustrated that the overseas electorate heavily rejected Marxist Corbyn and McCluskey, so now hoping for civil disobedience and an uprising.

It will never happen. The UK is inherently a conservative nation. For every angry 19 year old donning a Yasmin Arafat keffiyeh, slyly vandalising the possessions of others, statues or attacking the police, there are many fold who condemn that, oppose that and will see that they fail.

The quiet majority of Brits don’t take to fellow Brits not liking this country, talking it down, only finding negatives. Migrants at Sangatte haven’t heard that message, they like the positives, they seek escape to the overt and institutional racism in Italy, the Balkans and elsewhere. The UK is not half as bad as miserablists would have us believe.

This. Despite a lot. Despite everything. The centre of gravity here in the UK is fair, welcoming and collaborative.

The fringes include the psychopathic entrepreneurs (in business, the arts and the sciences) who barely notice the plebs while they graze on us, and the controlbots who want manage our plebian everything, income, what we read, who we pray to....and jolly red giant has a particular interest in our earning according to our need and our sacrifice according to ability. Mad at each end. F&ck 'em.

The Tories will carry on winning, and drifting to the right perhaps (albeit Boris, although a dictator not a democrat, is politically a centrist) all the while labour continues on its myopic quest to resolve the horcruxes of socialist purity (one for the Potter fans, there, and I love the Potters).

Labour may recover from the Milliband miscalculation, and I think it may, sooner than expected perhaps, thanks a great deal to the flagrant lack of appeal, empathy and common sense of the jolly purple-faced giantistas currently doing what looks like a shitehouse job of attempting to gain control of the party. Come on, Sir Steer Calmer!

And amen to that.

 

[Garry Nelson's teacher]

I appreciate JRG's contributions to this thread, although he might see this as 'repressive tolerance'. I think the chances of Labour regaining power is between zero and slim - and as Muhammad Ali once said, 'Slim has just left town'.
The likes of JRG cite Corbyn's 2015 performance as defying predictions of nay-sayers and he is right to do so. But we have to remember that JC was up against T. May and the worst Tory campaign for many years. The foul Johnson is a proven winner of the 'popular' vote and 2019 was never going to be 2017.
Given that Labour has been wiped out in Scotland, the electoral future looks grim. I think that strategically Labour is on the horns of a dilemma: under the current electoral system it is all but inconceivable they'll win back power this side of 2030, but under a PR system while they could be part of a 'stop the Tory' minority government, they'd be even less likely to be a majority government. It's conceivable that under the current electoral system there could be a similar outcome - but there'd need to be unprecedented co-operation prior to, rather than post, election.

Further, given that the Tories are sharp enough to know that electoral reform is about the only way their grubby mitts could be prised off the levers of power, then PR ain't going to happen.

Where does this lead us? Either Labour stays on the outside looking in or looks to build some sort of 'progressive alliance'. Which is worse? Personally I'd go for the latter. In which case the leader I'd look for is someone capable of building this (funnily enough Clive Lewis was making such noises). This leads us to the final dilemma: any potential leader that signalled this to the (current) labour membership would be toast.

The only hope is that Johnson and his cronies make such an enormous f*ck up, that somehow the electorate wakes up and sees sense. I wouldn't rule out the former, but I have little faith in the latter.

 

[Titanic]

Looks like a no-brainer...

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

Looks like a no-brainer...

View attachment 119844

Yep. Wrong-Bailey nailed on.

In seriouness, I'd positively rejoice if the momenti fail to mobilise on her behalf effectively. I still fear it, though.

 

[Gwylan]

Yep. Wrong-Bailey nailed on.

In seriouness, I'd positively rejoice if the momenti fail to mobilise on her behalf effectively. I still fear it, though.

Starmer is 4-1 on and shortening; Long-Bailey is 5-1. Bookies rarely get things wrong

 

[Mellor 3 Ward 4]

Starmer is 4-1 on and shortening; Long-Bailey is 5-1. Bookies rarely get things wrong

Sounds promising - once he's in, the Corbynistas, Momentum, Lansmann, RLB, McDonnell, Abbot, Owen Jones, Ash Sarkar etc. will be consigned to history and Labour can start to try to make themselves electable again.

 

[amexer]

I voted labour but like referendum go along with result Will give Boris a chance and make a judgement after 2 years. Appreciate it was just a speech but was very impressed with what he said yesterday. Unless we get right leader for LP I can see with his personality. if he doesnt do anything stupid could start to get back some of younger voters who usually vote L

 

[Weststander]

Sounds promising - once he's in, the Corbynistas, Momentum, Lansmann, RLB, McDonnell, Abbot, Owen Jones, Ash Sarkar etc. will be consigned to history and Labour can start to try to make themselves electable again.

As long Starmer doesn't scrape home, but with Unite/Momentum/their sympathisers end up dominating the National Executive and policy making. Starmer would then simply be a friendlier face to exactly the same agenda as before, he wouldn't be able to be his own man with a plausible and winning strategy.

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

Sounds promising - once he's in, the Corbynistas, Momentum, Lansmann, RLB, McDonnell, Abbot, Owen Jones, Ash Sarkar etc. will be consigned to history and Labour can start to try to make themselves electable again.

After a short period of diplomatic disengagement by Sir Steer Calmer, hopefully.

So, now standby for the momental dirty tricks...

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

As long Starmer doesn't scrape home, but with Unite/Momentum/their sympathisers end up dominating the National Executive and policy making. Starmer would then simply be a friendlier face to exactly the same agenda as before, he wouldn't be able to be his own man with a plausible and winning strategy.

Thinking about it, he needs to act swiftly, like Blair did. Let's imagine he romps home (with the support of members). He can't then be held to ransom by the momenti in the executive. They would have no moral authority. If Corbyn changed the constitution so the party became duty bound to stick with conference resolutions Starmer would need to get rid of that quickly. That said I'm not sure Corbyn did let conference dictate all policy - conference backed remain but Jezza didn't, so the leader presumably still has power - when it suits him.

If Starmer scrapes home it will be because blocs of the rank and file back Wong Bailey. As the winner, again, I'd act swiftly to unempower the rank and file, as Blair did. If the rank and file effectively want a series of annual referendums to determine policies (at conference) with the leader's hands tied, there will be a fight. The first rule of politics is be nimble. The second rule is if you can't be nimble, park everything till connference and spend the other 364 days trying to nobble your opponents inside the party. Starmer would be a fool to allow that. Wrong Baliey is a fool so she would revel in that. 'Democratic', like.

Decision time, folks. If the betting is correct we may be about to be on the road back to a two party system again. Amen to that.

 

[BLOCK F]

I appreciate JRG's contributions to this thread, although he might see this as 'repressive tolerance'. I think the chances of Labour regaining power is between zero and slim - and as Muhammad Ali once said, 'Slim has just left town'.
The likes of JRG cite Corbyn's 2015 performance as defying predictions of nay-sayers and he is right to do so. But we have to remember that JC was up against T. May and the worst Tory campaign for many years. The foul Johnson is a proven winner of the 'popular' vote and 2019 was never going to be 2017.
Given that Labour has been wiped out in Scotland, the electoral future looks grim. I think that strategically Labour is on the horns of a dilemma: under the current electoral system it is all but inconceivable they'll win back power this side of 2030, but under a PR system while they could be part of a 'stop the Tory' minority government, they'd be even less likely to be a majority government. It's conceivable that under the current electoral system there could be a similar outcome - but there'd need to be unprecedented co-operation prior to, rather than post, election.

Further, given that the Tories are sharp enough to know that electoral reform is about the only way their grubby mitts could be prised off the levers of power, then PR ain't going to happen.

Where does this lead us? Either Labour stays on the outside looking in or looks to build some sort of 'progressive alliance'. Which is worse? Personally I'd go for the latter. In which case the leader I'd look for is someone capable of building this (funnily enough Clive Lewis was making such noises). This leads us to the final dilemma: any potential leader that signalled this to the (current) labour membership would be toast.

The only hope is that Johnson and his cronies make such an enormous f*ck up, that somehow the electorate wakes up and sees sense. I wouldn't rule out the former, but I have little faith in the latter.

Tory voter here.
You are correct re the toast assumption. Keir Starmer and Lisa Nandy (I discount Thornberry completely) appear to be going out of their way to tiptoe very carefully around the sensibilities of the Labour membership, and for me, this prevents them really showing their true colours or beliefs. I think we can assume RLB IS showing her true colours.
I rather like the way Lisa Nandy has approached interviews and how she comes across, but I'm still not sure we know much about her. Starmer is far better known, but I don't think he has the presence to become an inspiring leader, additionally, his perceived 'Metropolitanism' and 'Remainness' may not appeal to some.
Finally, as a Tory voter, I don't want Johnson et al to make an enormous f--k up, not least of all because it would be the country that would suffer. I would far rather the Labour Party got its act together and once again became an electable party that was voted the party of Government on its own merits.
Anyway, Lisa Nandy for me..............I think!
P.S.Any party that voted RBL and /or Burgon to lead them doesn't deserve to be in Government!

 

[Audax]

So far, Nandy edges it for me. As much for Labour finally having a female leader as for anything else. Starmer next, as the party doesn't need a Corbynite following on from Corbyn. Corbynism is a busted flush that needs to be folded, not doubled down on.

Regardless of who gets it ... they need to be a strong, but reasonable, voice that holds Boris to account. Especially as we're already seeing Boris attempting to water down / back pedal on some of his election promises and with Labour in the midst of a leadership election he's basically got an open goal at the moment.

 

[Titanic]

Yep. Wrong-Bailey nailed on.

In seriouness, I'd positively rejoice if the momenti fail to mobilise on her behalf effectively. I still fear it, though.

Surely they couldn't be so stupid??

 

[beorhthelm]

Surely they couldn't be so stupid??

would have to question any polling that puts Thornberry ahead of Long-Bailey, but it supports theory Nandy could sneak through the middle on second preferences. 8/1

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

View attachment 119924

Surely they couldn't be so stupid??

They could and I expect they will. Wrong Bailey will mop up the votes of most of the other two candidates as they each come last. However, if she finishes in last place in the next round she's out. So labour members with a brain should now vote tactically in the next ballot....

My money would still be on Wrong Baliey to end up as leader of the unelectable, sadly, were I a betting man.

 

[BensGrandad]

I must admit that I had virtually forgotten that they were electing a new leader as nothing of note mentioned on the news etc.

 

[Bold Seagull]

I must admit that I had virtually forgotten that they were electing a new leader as nothing of note mentioned on the news etc.

You mean nothing in The Sun before you turn the pages to do the sudoko on the puzzle pages?

 

[BLOCK F]

They could and I expect they will. Wrong Bailey will mop up the votes of most of the other two candidates as they each come last. However, if she finishes in last place in the next round she's out. So labour members with a brain should now vote tactically in the next ballot....

My money would still be on Wrong Baliey to end up as leader of the unelectable, sadly, were I a betting man.

Surely not, Harry.
'Our brilliant Beccy' as named by the old ghoul McDonnell, is getting quite a bit of stick, bordering on piss taking in some of the media, or that is the impression I get.
You may be right though, if enough lunatics have taken over .........you know the rest!