This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.
There's still time to join the Labour party if you want a say in who the new leader will be but you only have until 5.00pm tomorrow.
Over 100000 have joined the party. Who they are going to vote for is of course a question that won't be answered for some weeks.
https://m.huffingtonpost.co.uk/amp/entry/labour-members-surge-leadership-co...
2
6
In reply to Removed User:
> Over 100000 have joined the party.
Some of them are ven genuine labour supporters.
But the majority have signed up to ensure a hopeless candidate is ushered in
9
In reply to Deadeye:
> But the majority have signed up to ensure a hopeless candidate is ushered in
So much choice!
8
1
In reply to Clarence:
but means the anti-kier starmer vote will be split 4 ways
1
In reply to NERD:
I don’t have much time for Jess politically, but I did grow up in loosely the same circles as her. Having met a few time over the years I can assure you the accent is not a put on.
5
In reply to NERD:
> [...] Starmer's another Corbyn.
Starmer ex QC, and DPP. Corbyn ongoing protest-meister.
Starmer, able to think on feet and forensically hold the PM to account at PMQs. Corbyn reads out complaining emails from Mrs Trellis of Prestatyn at PMQs.
Yes it's easy to see how you'd think they were chips off the same block...
21
In reply to NERD:
> Nandy is centrist, pragmatic and she even has a sense of humour. I bet she comes last. Good thing too because I think Labour are electing a sacrificial lamb.
Her comments on Scottish Independence are absolutely shocking. She said Catalonia was a good model for dealing with 'divisive nationalists', Looks like you can get kicked out of Labour for criticising Israel but arresting politicians and using riot cops to beat the Scots into submission is absolutely fine.
4
3
In reply to tom_in_edinburgh:
> Her comments on Scottish Independence are absolutely shocking.
I agree. What was she thinking?
Pity, because I quite like her otherwise
Post edited at 11:39
1
In reply to Andy Hardy
> Starmer, able to think on feet and forensically hold the PM to account at PMQs.
Yes, he would rip Johnson apart - it would be most entertaining. I would be optimistic that Labour could actually win the next election under Starmer.
3
In reply to Robert Durran:
> Yes, he would rip Johnson apart - it would be most entertaining.
Aside from PMQ doesnt really work that way. Bunch of braying yobs in the background and no real ability to force answers.
In reply to tom_in_edinburgh:
Yes what she was referring to was the recent Catalonian election where the Left beat the nationalist parties.
You really need to be a bit less parochial and partisan.
4
2
In reply to Robert Durran:
> In reply to Andy Hardy
> Yes, he would rip Johnson apart - it would be most entertaining. I would be optimistic that Labour could actually win the next election under Starmer.
Quite.
Starmer is electable, the others are less well known and less experienced. RLB has the backing of Momentum and should be viewed as the continuity candidate.
In reply to NERD:
> Sorry I don't mean put on, I mean exaggerated.
Where's your proof for this?
You'll be telling us you couldn't vote for Starmer, because he's from a well off family and went to university next!!
1
2
In reply to Deadeye:
> But the majority have signed up to ensure a hopeless candidate is ushered in
Which one's the hopeless one?
1
In reply to Removed User:
Anyone but Starmer and Labour could be looking at oblivion imo....actually that would be guaranteed with RLB as leader.
In reply to Blunderbuss:
> Anyone but Starmer and Labour could be looking at oblivion imo....actually that would be guaranteed with RLB as leader.
I'm not about the rest but RLB is too closely associated with Corbyn and thus toxic. Thornberry, Nandy and Philips might have what it takes and have four years to make their mark.
In reply to Removed User:
> Yes what she was referring to was the recent Catalonian election where the Left beat the nationalist parties.
Everybody knows what is going on in Catalonia. That's her lame excuse after she got called out on her completely offensive initial comments. She's going for Brexiteer votes in the English constituencies that turned Tory and she's calculating there's no downside to offending Scotland.
2
4
In reply to NERD:
> Well I don't have any proof, it's just a feeling. I wish I'd keep it to myself now. I've no problems with Starmer's background or accent, I just think he's too left wing.
Me too really, but to be honest, it's that sort of in built prejudice which casues so many problems within our society as a whole and while you may not have problems with Starmer's back ground or accent, that's exactly what's being pushed in the DM and the Sun!
In reply to Removed User:
The Huff Post is hardly balanced reporting though is it? and how do they know people currently joining Labour are "moderates" whatever that means, when once again I have to point out the Tories are implementing some of Labours policies. Remember who fought against austerity?
1
In reply to NERD:
> Sorry that passed me by. I'm English but I support another independance referendum in Scotland. I think Scotland, Northern Ireland and Wales should have a referendum before England drags them out of the EU. And Gibraltar!
Didn't you see my post where I pointed out that his accusation was a false one?
1
2
In reply to Removed User:
> Everybody knows what is going on in Catalonia.
https://twitter.com/Card007Teri/status/1217613243897778176/photo/1
1
In reply to NERD:
> Labour could have negotiated a soft Brexit with May when they had the chance but all they did was push for an election. Ideology over pragmatism.
That would have required the Maybot to have countermanded her orders from the ERG, which never happened.
In reply to NERD:
> No, I think he'd be much better than Corbyn at the dispatch box. However I think he is too left wing and his decisions are influenced by idology rather than pragmatism.
But pragmatism must go both ways. Whereas it is very tempting to go for a leader that is not associated with the power circle around Corbyn, the new leader must be able to lead the entire party and momentum is a part thereof.
I think the 4 years to get into shape suggested higher up in the thread is very much overstated. There is a real chance that Johnson gets into serious trouble when the effects of brexit are undeniable (so 01.01.21 if he doesn't extend the transition) and then Labour must look like a proper government in waiting. This requires both a lot of management skills and frontbench experience.
So I think Starmer would be good for the party.
PS. I agree with you regarding soft brexit, but the failure here lies with May and Corbyn, not Starmer.
1
In reply to HansStuttgart:
> I think the 4 years to get into shape suggested higher up in the thread is very much overstated. There is a real chance that Johnson gets into serious trouble when the effects of brexit are undeniable (so 01.01.21 if he doesn't extend the transition) and then Labour must look like a proper government in waiting. This requires both a lot of management skills and frontbench experience.
However much trouble Johnson gets into (most of it will be easily shrugged off as 'EU aggression' and traitorous opposition sabotage) the answer won't be an election. The press can't turn on brexit, they backed it to the hilt so they won't turn on the brexit government even if Johnson eventually needs to go under the bus (more likely he gets a full 10 years IMO), the solution will be more blue on blue factional infighting over the one true brexit. The opposition however organised and compelling can't hope to force an election before 2024 and there is no way in hell a government elected with a landslide majority to 'get brexit done' will go back to the electorate because the brexit they promised turns out to be not a very good idea.
jk
1
1
In reply to jkarran:
Sadly you're probably right.
Ending up with no deal should result in a GE but if it does happen and I don't think it will, they'll just hang on in there.
In reply to krikoman:
> The Huff Post is hardly balanced reporting though is it? and how do they know people currently joining Labour are "moderates"
I don't know and you're right to point that out. However it does seem that a lot of people have joined the party.
In reply to NERD:
> Hey man, yeah I saw that. I actually have no idea who said what or when they said it. Was just pointing out to Tom that I personally support Scotland having a second independence referendum.
Fine but the majority in Scotland don't.
In reply to NERD:
> Well that's just daft. Starmer has a long and well documented history of fighting for justice and equality. His actions completely outweigh any privilege he had at birth.
Eh? He’s the son of a nurse and a toolmaker and the first in his family to attend university. That’s hardly posh.
He didn’t even go to Oxford until his second degree
2
In reply to NERD:
> How so? If the turnout for the Referendum is much higher than the GE then anything could happen. I think if Glasgow turned out Scotland could vote for independence.
You said you supported a second referendum.
I pointed out that the majority of Scots don't. Here's the evidence: https://www.edinburghnews.scotsman.com/news/claiming-there-mandate-indyref2...
Don't get fooled into thinking a noisy minority is actually the majority.
In reply to krikoman:
> and how do they know people currently joining Labour are "moderates" whatever that means,
I've rejoined after 20 odd years of not being a member, and I'm a moderate. So suck it up comrade. What you think of Momentum's "vote" for who they will support? It's almost like they're planning to undermine RLB by making it that easy to stick labels like "Soviet Union-worthy" to her!
In reply to NERD:
> Sorry to disagree but I don't think we'll get a hard brexit.
No freedom of movement means hard brexit. And the discussion on freedom of movement was lost when both Labour and Conservatives wanted to get rid of it in the years following the referendum. Even the LibDems spent their 5 years in government working on getting rid of FoM.
But I agree that Johnson will probably extend the transition and accept a deal with lots more alignment than is currently planned for.
My point is simply that Labour needs to get their act together a lot faster than "we'll have a decent organization structure once again before 2024." And that this requires competence and not only the right ideology.
In reply to jkarran:
> However much trouble Johnson gets into (most of it will be easily shrugged off as 'EU aggression' and traitorous opposition sabotage) the answer won't be an election. The press can't turn on brexit, they backed it to the hilt so they won't turn on the brexit government even if Johnson eventually needs to go under the bus (more likely he gets a full 10 years IMO), the solution will be more blue on blue factional infighting over the one true brexit. The opposition however organised and compelling can't hope to force an election before 2024 and there is no way in hell a government elected with a landslide majority to 'get brexit done' will go back to the electorate because the brexit they promised turns out to be not a very good idea.
> jk
Hi,
I don't think the election is the most likely scenario (I think Johnson will postpone real decisions). But Labour should be prepared for one nevertheless. Being seen as a decent professional organization while the Tories are mainly occupied with factional infighting is an advantage.
10 years is too far ahead. Everybody thought Thatcher was safe up until the poll tax as well.
Hans
In reply to NERD:
> I accepted the Referendum result immediately. I thought they were advantages for the UK if we aligned with the Scandinavian countries and joined the EEA. Meaning we would still have free movement, ECJ jurisdiction and we would pay into the EU budget. However we would be free to form new trade deals, and if the new trade policy was successful we would be in a good place to step back from the EU, maybe in a decade.
I'm pretty sure being in the EEA and striking our own trade deals are mutually exclusive. However TM's (or the ERG's) infamous "red lines" meant none of that was even on the table.
> I think the majority of Tories feel the same way I do. The ERG want a clean break but they are willing to compromise. I believe over half of them voted for May's deal the 3rd time of asking.
A clean break is simply a very hard, cliff edge brexit. They showed themselves completely uninterested in the sorts of compromise required to join the EEA
> If May and Corbyn and thrashed out a softer brexit deal (May wanted a soft brexit too) and Corbyn had whipped his MP's to vote for it then May could have passed her deal with over 100 rebels and as long as Corbyn and May worked together they could have passed all the legislation.
But Corbyn wants a hard brexit, because he thinks that the EU will stop him seizing the means of production (I paraphrase) and neither of them are grown up enough to put the national interest before party / ideology.
1
In reply to BnB:
> Eh? He’s the son of a nurse and a toolmaker and the first in his family to attend university. That’s hardly posh.
> He didn’t even go to Oxford until his second degree
Nandy's the posh one from good stock. she could almost give the Johnsons a run for their money
1
1
1
In reply to Removed User:
> I don't know and you're right to point that out. However it does seem that a lot of people have joined the party.
A lot of people let their membership lapse after getting Corbyn in, and they want their say again, but you might be right, the party is a broad church and hopefully there is room for everyone.
what does "moderate" mean though? Because there wasn't that much in the manifesto which, if you read it, was very extreme, the media made sure everyone thought it was but there really wasn't that much to be afraid of.
Post edited at 09:16
In reply to TobyA:
> I've rejoined after 20 odd years of not being a member, and I'm a moderate. So suck it up comrade. What you think of Momentum's "vote" for who they will support? It's almost like they're planning to undermine RLB by making it that easy to stick labels like "Soviet Union-worthy" to her!
Well done you? What do you want a red star? What I was saying is there's no real way of knowing what leanings new members have until there's a vote. You don't sign up and tick a box for Blairite, Moderate or Stalinist.
As for Momentum, you'll be telling us they should be silenced or put on some terrorist list, surely it's a democracy they can support who they want, or don't you think they should have a voice?
In reply to krikoman:
> As for Momentum, you'll be telling us they should be silenced or put on some terrorist list, surely it's a democracy they can support who they want, or don't you think they should have a voice?
Yes - but Momentum HQ polled Momentum members as to who Momentum should officially support in the leadership election (as an affiliated group I guess), but in their poll of members there was only one choice, Rebecca Long Bailey. So you could either vote for RLB or not, members weren't asked if Momentum should support anyone else. Doesn't that strike you as ridiculous? Long Bailey seems to be at times trying to appeal to all parts of the Labour movement, and move away from "Continuity Corbyn" tag at least partly, but then Lansman and the Momentum Leadership go and do that - just playing into all the caricatures of the "hard left".
2
In reply to krikoman:
> A lot of people let their membership lapse after getting Corbyn in, and they want their say again, but you might be right, the party is a broad church and hopefully there is room for everyone.
I've since read on Twitter that MPs who have been calling the new members find that many were intending to vote for Jess Philips. Not sure how much credibility to lend to that.
In reply to Removed User:
Nandy is a good bet. She is the only one who has at least taken on being interviewed by Morgan,Andrew Neil and I had to laugh when she told Nick Robinson not to be daft this morning.
I have not heard any politician lately being able to put down Morgan and Neil like her from any party. You need somebody who can do that.
Pretty impressive back history as well and a Northern voice.
In reply to TobyA
> Yes - but Momentum HQ polled Momentum members as to who Momentum should officially support in the leadership election (as an affiliated group I guess), but in their poll of members there was only one choice, Rebecca Long Bailey.
Well let's just look at that, Momentum are not Labour and they don't have a block vote, their members each have a single vote, if they are members of the Labour party. Are you suggesting that because Momentum are endorsing RLB every member of Momentum will vote for her?
The poll you're alluding to, only 18.5% actually responded, so it's a bit of a leap to get from there to where you intimating we are / going to end up.
In reply to Removed User:
> I've since read on Twitter that MPs who have been calling the new members find that many were intending to vote for Jess Philips. Not sure how much credibility to lend to that.
They'll struggle to do that now
In reply to neilh:
I agree, she's seems pretty savvy, not that others aren't.
In reply to krikoman:
Far more media savvy. None of the others have been interviewed by Morgan or Neil.
clearly confident enough not to hide or run from them.
worth its weight in gold in this day and age
This topic has been archived, and won't accept reply postings.
Loading Notifications...