who should become Labour leader?

[nevermind, neoliberalism has had it 159]

Now that Yvette cooper has thrown her toys out of the pram and accusing the men of being sexist, her final campaign card, who will get the Labour leadership?Will it be a Blair clone, or Corbyn?Here is a hilarious piece from the Belfast Telegraph, worth reading every word. enjoyhttp://www.belfasttelegraph.co.uk/opinion/columnists/mark-steel/the-last-thing-labour-needs-is-a-leader-like-jeremy-corbyn-who-people-want-to-vote-for-31402186.html

[cannigia1 0]

ally mc coist

[Herman 9,756]

I like that[Y]I want Corbyn. Simply because he has some political beliefs. Which in itself is a rarity in Westminster nowadays. I don''t actually agree with some of them and I can''t see him winning a general election, our ''free'' press will see to that, but he may get the soul back into the Labour Party, where they discuss things that matter to the working man, and stop being a slighly nicer Tory party.Up the beardy hippy!

[ricardo 7,385]

Corbyn would be a wet dream come true for the Tories. In fact many Tories have joined up for three quid a go simply to make it so.A sad day for Labour but they brought it upon themselves. They always seem much happier in opposition than they do in government.

[Badger 2,405]

[quote user="ricardo"]Corbyn would be a wet dream

come true for the Tories. In fact many Tories have joined up for three quid a

go simply to make it so.

A sad day for Labour but they brought it upon themselves. They always seem much

happier in opposition than they do in government.

[/quote]

I''m not particularly in favour of Corbyn but at least he makes it reasonably

clear what he thinks. In our "so-called" democracy this is relatively

unusual - and is a declining trend. IMO it one of the reasons that people are

so disengaged with politics. For example,  I''m reading Anthony Seldon''s

biography of Blair at the moment and what was pretty apparent (In Seldon''s

analysis) is that he was totally focussed on gaining power but other then

"third way" clichés had little real idea of what he wanted to do with

it when he got there.

There was a time, Ricardo, when I was growing up and you were a young man, when

politicians used to write coherent books outlining their political views.

Policy was discussed meaningfully and alternatives considered. This is no

longer the case and the electorate are not presented with real alternatives by

either labour or the Tories - hence UKIP on the right and the Greens on the

left - (it also looks like the Lib Dems will move back to the left of labour as

well after the Orange book disaster).

The timidness of so-called "Red Ed" is illustrated in the way that he

was totally outflanked by George Osborne on the minimum (living) wage - Labour

would not have even dared to stand on such a policy.

[ricardo 7,385]

[quote user=" Badger"]

[quote user="ricardo"]Corbyn would be a wet dream

come true for the Tories. In fact many Tories have joined up for three quid a

go simply to make it so.

A sad day for Labour but they brought it upon themselves. They always seem much

happier in opposition than they do in government.

[/quote]

I''m not particularly in favour of Corbyn but at least he makes it reasonably

clear what he thinks. In our "so-called" democracy this is relatively

unusual - and is a declining trend. IMO it one of the reasons that people are

so disengaged with politics. For example,  I''m reading Anthony Seldon''s

biography of Blair at the moment and what was pretty apparent (In Seldon''s

analysis) is that he was totally focussed on gaining power but other then

"third way" clichés had little real idea of what he wanted to do with

it when he got there.

There was a time, Ricardo, when I was growing up and you were a young man, when

politicians used to write coherent books outlining their political views.

Policy was discussed meaningfully and alternatives considered. This is no

longer the case and the electorate are not presented with real alternatives by

either labour or the Tories - hence UKIP on the right and the Greens on the

left - (it also looks like the Lib Dems will move back to the left of labour as

well after the Orange book disaster).

The timidness of so-called "Red Ed" is illustrated in the way that he

was totally outflanked by George Osborne on the minimum (living) wage - Labour

would not have even dared to stand on such a policy.

[/quote]I''m afraid that Labour have imploded big time, Badger. Every Government needs an effective opposition and Labour no longer seem capable of even this, let alone looking like an alternative Government. What we are seeing now is the results of the damage done by Gordon Brown when he destroyed all his rivals. The big beasts are either dead or have quit the field and the present leadership quartet consists of three midgets and a tired old Marxist.Wouldn''t surprise me at all to see the Marxist win. Unless something changes and barring unexpected events Labour have certainly forfeited 2020 and quite possibly 2025 as well.

[nevermind, neoliberalism has had it 159]

Its not just Labour, Ricardo, its all political parties that are in decline, because we are more central to information flows and had enough of their self serving ways, their hypocritical moral interference and biased solutions for society.Corbyn will most likely win, but what would he do if the Blairites stall and pervert his cabinet to whatever they like? He will never change the other three back to their roots, but he might ring their bells to remind them of what Labour once was.I hope that he will be inclusive and not too risk avert, he wants Scottish votes/support back, but he also shares a lot of policies with the SNP.   If the Blairites want to sidestep him in a coup de grass, he will have no more home in Labour.All political parties have lost support and it is time to introduce a fair proportional voting system. And please, don''t tell us we had one, there was no choice. I call a sole choice a take it or leave it ultimatum....I think that most will now agree that the case for abolishing the House of Lords has been made more than once, Hanningfield, Janner, Sewell, whatever are we waiting for. Instead we hear of Cameron''s lust to create more Lords, more Tory donations, macabre ancient rituals to serve the status quo.

[Badger 2,405]

It might well be that the Labour Party forfeits 2020 and 2025. It could be even more fundamental than that. The Labour party should be in existential crisis.

There is no point to the Labour Party if it is simply acting like the Tory party. There is little difference between the two. For example, it was Labour, not the Tories, that really introduced "marketization of the NHS." Similarly, they introduced tuition fees, academisation and we all know the consequences of the neo liberal de-regulation of the banks! Whilst there were some progressive measures – minimum wage; ameliorating third world debt etc, they were not really a genuine alternative, but a slightly diluted version. The last government introduced some policies that were more progressive than labour had done – extra funding for lower socio-economic groups and raising threshold of taxation + the current government has been more radical on “living (minimum) wage” than Labour even dared to be.

Politics is more than a competition where you want “your side” to win. For it to be truly democratic it needs to offer a genuine choice. I don’t think that the Tory government will have the comfortable time that they are imagining that they will with a European Referendum on the horizon and a slim majority. I really believe that a realignment of political parties with fundamental structural change is likely to be on the agenda within a few years.

[mrs miggins 0]

Sick of all these useless watered down Blairites filling up the party. Corbyn could be the best thing to happen to Labour in years which is why I''ve registered as a labour supporter for the first time in my life. Never thought I''d say that.

Even if you disagree with his views, he''s the only politician except Farage willing to speak his mind. We need strong MP''s instead of champagne socialists and toffs who are in it for the ride. Vive la revolution bitches!

[ricardo 7,385]

[quote user="mrs miggins"]Sick of all these useless watered down Blairites filling up the party. Corbyn could be the best thing to happen to Labour in years which is why I''ve registered as a labour supporter for the first time in my life. Never thought I''d say that.

Even if you disagree with his views, he''s the only politician except Farage willing to speak his mind. We need strong MP''s instead of champagne socialists and toffs who are in it for the ride. Vive la revolution bitches![/quote]Yes, Labour always put Socialist purity before common sense after a heavy defeat. Blair gave them three election wins and almost made the the natural party of Government but they hated him for it. They really seem to believe that the reason they lost was because they weren''t left wing enough. Its nothing more than a re-run of the 1980''s when they swallowed the same cock-eyed nonsense and it took them 18 years to realise that instead of talking to the electorate they had only been talking to themselves.The country needs a strong opposition that can be seen as an alternative Government. It has to be able to appeal to a wide body of people not just a combination of students, union members and various discontented minorities. Unfortunately Labour has always been happier preaching to the converted but increasing their majorities in Liverpool, the North and London won''t get them the required seats to form a Government.As I stated up thread, Corbyn is a wet dream for the Tories, he will be poison in the marginal seats of the Midlands where elections are won and lost. He is Michael Foot Mk 2 and if he becomes Labour leader he will deliver them a similar result to 1983.

[mrs miggins 0]

Spoken like a true Tory, but tbf I do think you''re right on your points about how Cam-moron and Osbourne will be happy to get such a left wing/socialist on the opposite side of the bench.

There''s many theories in the Labour party as to why they lost the election, mostly they said Ed was too left wing and also that they didn''t communicate their principles enough to the voter.

The reason why I am voting for Corbyn is not because I think he will win the general election in 2020, but because if he is made leader, there will be the possibility of a significant change in the political landscape. I''m not saying he''ll be the next Atlee or Wilson, nothing quite like that, yet, on that point, it is funny how the media are saying that a ''left wing'' candidate couldn''t possibly win an election - "It''ll never happen" - hopefully we''ll have Paddy Ashdown eating his hat again.

However, on the other hand, if he does get elected to be the leader and (fails) destroys the party, which is possible, I don''t see this as a bad thing either. Whats the point in Labour if we have the likes of Cooper as leader? What good are they? They are a pointless party as they are and its a great thing that Corbyn is in the race. It''s make or break for Labour, what better way than to possibly conclude it with the very principles it started out with?

As I say, I think you''ll be right Ricardo and the Tories would expect a landslide, but personally I can''t help but put my faith in a substitute geography teacher look-a-like who could well conjure up the feeling that Blair did in 97'' (at the time called ''lefty'') which had most people feeling as if Britain stood for something that isn''t just the cold leftovers of a Thatcher / Major government promoting the worst of human nature. We have the chance to actually believe that the government would be trying to help the poorest in our society by "investing in people" instead of the conservative fools who only seem to care about one thing and one thing only. I''m satisfied to have a Tory government in power like most people, so when there is a chance for positive change why not go for it? especially as the Tories seem even more clueless than Blairs Labour government.

[Herman 9,756]

"Corbyn is a wet dream for the Tories," Ricardo.They all are. The other three are wetter than a haddock''s bathing costume and are not turning the public on with their ideas, whatever they are. Corbyn is the best of a bad bunch, and as people are after something different to the boring, college politicians, he may be more of a worry.

[ricardo 7,385]

[quote user="Herman "]"Corbyn is a wet dream for the Tories," Ricardo.They all are. The other three are wetter than a haddock''s bathing costume and are not turning the public on with their ideas, whatever they are. Corbyn is the best of a bad bunch, and as people are after something different to the boring, college politicians, he may be more of a worry.[/quote]Gordon Brown steamrollered anyone who looked like being a rival and Labour are now paying a heavy penalty for that with the paucity of talent on show in this election. It will be difficult for Labour to show that they can run the country when at present they can''t even be trusted to run the Labour Party. All Governments need at least a semi competent opposition or Parliamentary Democracy cannot work and that would be the real disaster. Politics never ceases to surprise, I thought we were going to see a re-alignment on the right with the rise of UKIP but it now looks like the major factor will be a re-alignment on the left. It will be interesting to see how this all plays out over the next few years.

[mrs miggins 0]

It is interesting seeing labour split on this. Liz Kendall and Yvett Cooper have said they would not work under Corbyn if he was (democratically) elected whilst Burnham has said he would. As far as I''m concerned this is a good thing as Kendall is a tory scummer in disguise and doesn''t belong anywhere near Labour. Although I''m not Will Self''s biggest fan, I do think he''s right in saying Labour has become too much of a broad church in that there is such a large spectrum of MPs on the right, centre and left. Although I can''t see them winning anytime soon, Labour needs core principles once again and to not be shy in saying them. Unfortunately the media seem to portray Corbyn as a left wing socialist (and rather laughably Marxist) but looking at his principles, they''re very similar to Burnham''s, they just don''t seem to mention that. The difference between Corbyn and Burnham imo is that I actually believe he''ll actually try to do the things he''s says he''ll do.

[Herman 9,756]

Liz Kendall can f right off. She is part of the reason people like Corbyn. Just another career politician with no political beliefs.

[ricardo 7,385]

Silly student sloganising about wicked Tories and ten minutes to save our NHS were rightly seen as juvenile nonsense by the voters. Now it seems that Labour members are bent on turning a once great progressive movement into a toothless protest and debating society. Ejaculating comrade Corbyn onto the faces of an electorate that has just rejected you seems to me to be nothing more than an act of petulant Bukkakke.Bringing back clause four and re-opening the coal mines............oh deary me.

[Herman 9,756]

I''ve just learned a new word. Dirty Ricardo[:D]

[ricardo 7,385]

[quote user="Herman "]I''ve just learned a new word. Dirty Ricardo[:D][/quote]It seemed an appropriate adjective to use in the circumstances.[:D]

[ricardo 7,385]

[quote user="ricardo"][quote user="Herman "]I''ve just learned a new word. Dirty Ricardo[:D][/quote]It seemed an appropriate adjective to use in the circumstances.[:D][/quote]What I should have said was that the adjective invited the noun.

[nevermind, neoliberalism has had it 159]

out today in the Huff post, a poll that clearly makes the whinge of desperate Tony a spluttering complete and utter fallacy. Talking of the annihilation of the Labour party should JC be selected. Today they wheeled our retired horse trader in gold G. Broon, the final red Tory to be flushed out by JC this week, to mutter a similar tune.facts speak louder than words, voters would rather vote for JC at a general election than for any of the other candidates.http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2015/08/14/jeremy-corbyn-would-win-more-votes-at-general-election-poll-finds_n_7989800.html?utm_hp_ref=uk-politics&ir=UK+PoliticsAnd this is a far more logical and clear understanding of labours pangs at present, an article from Bryan Gould, ex labour MP who never became PM, now retired in NZ.http://londonprogressivejournal.com/article/view/2265/a-corbyn-leadership

[nevermind, neoliberalism has had it 159]

Just to report on a dud.Yesterday the MSM wheeled out chairman Broon, Brown says this:  "Don’t tell me that we can do much for the poor of the world if the alliances we favour most are with Hezbollah, Hamas, Chávez’s successor in Venezuela and Putin’s totalitarian Russia."So what of our business dealings with …Azerbaijan, Bahrain, Saudi Arabia, Israel, Myanmar, Kazakhstan, Egypt, Colombia, and the pretty dodgy bunch running Ukraine... Mr. Brown?    Oh, and Blair’s not too proud to talk with Hamas (in Qatar, which supports Hamas) even if Broon’s got, er, principles. And Hezbullah… isn’t that fighting ISIS, with very little help from Broon? And what of the prince of darkness, Lord Mandelslime, who wanted Liz kendall to resign in favour of Andy Burnham and after not getting his way wanting the copntest to be cancelled, he has this Oligarch business consultancy, only the richest here please,  would he be ''dealing with Putin''s totalitarian Russia''? basically Broon the elders contribution amounts to nothing more than a...dudd.  

[mrs miggins 0]

I don''t think Blair, Brown, Mandelson, A Campbell and David Milliband (today''s the latest to speak out) realise that by speaking strongly against Corbyn, they only widen his appeal.

[ricardo 7,385]

[quote user="mrs miggins"]I don''t think Blair, Brown, Mandelson, A Campbell and David Milliband (today''s the latest to speak out) realise that by speaking strongly against Corbyn, they only widen his appeal.[/quote]I think the point that they are trying to make Migggo, is that Corbyn''s appeal will never be wide enough for Labour to win an election. Without power they are nothing more than a protest group. Perhaps this is the Labour comfort zone and makes the members feel good and virtuous but it sure as hell is never going to give them the power to actually do anything.

[mrs miggins 0]

I do realise that it''s the point they''re making but its not helping their own cause. The people who support Corbyn already now feel stronger in favour of him whilst many who accepted the medias portrayal of him before (as an 1980''s unelectable candidate) are also now turning to him.

Brown looked like a caged lion when he spoke and David Milliband''s article was extremely poor in the guardian which fooled no-one, Tristam Hunt is the only person who has spoke against Corbyn (newsnight) and not come out looking like an @rsehole (which is strange because he is one; another who deserves to be in the conservative party). Yvette Cooper has also told Andy Burnham to step down as a candidate today which will also anger anyone with principles, not just Corbyn supporters.

I can perhaps understand why he is seen as ''unelectable'' and ''too left wing'' (which is strange because his policies are very similar to Andy Burnham''s). I think the main problem is that people don''t know his policies as it''s seen that they are already ''not credible'' and are ''unworkable.'' If he was chosen to be leader, he''d have quite a long period of time still to make sure he can explain these policies to the public and communicate how they would be applied.

However on the other hand I''m not sure I buy into this ''too left'' thing. I think a lot of people did oppose the Iraq war, I think a lot of people do hate austerity which has hit the poorest in our society, I do think people are sick of corporations not paying tax whilst they do, I do think people are sick of the significant rise in the poor using food banks since the tory government got in, I do think people are sick of a government who badly model themselves on a Blair government, I do think people are sick of personality politics and want to hear the substance of what politicians say, I do think people want investment in small businesses, I do think people want higher tax for higher earners, I do think people want new homes built, I do think people want a living wage instead of a false living wage which will be introduced by the tories - which doesn''t actually benefit working people, of course it turns out they''ll be worse off (who would''ve thunk it, with the tories right.)

There is support for Corbyn now and if he does succeed in becoming the Labour leader his support will continue to grow, how much of course is the question. His success imo will be how well he can articulate his policies. People thought Clement Atlee was a radical left winger and got much support and is the best prime minister we''ve ever had, yet times have moved on a lot since then. People thought Michael Foot was a radical left winger and didn''t have the support from the public - again, times have moved on a lot since then.

[ricardo 7,385]

I agree that times have moved on but there is no more chance of Labour winning power with a far left platform than there ever was. This country will simply not elect a party from either extreme, be it left or right. We live in a small "c" conservative country and that isn''t likely to change. The lesson of history is that elections are won in the middle ground and while I agree that the middle ground is often stretched a bit left or right depending upon the leader, it certainly can''t be stretched as far as Corbyn.Labour may well extend it''s support to more of the left but will lose as many if not more in the centre ground. Creating a civil war in the Labour party is not going to be of any help to the people you profess to support and labeling everybody to the right of Andy Burnham as a Tory is nothing more than juvenile name calling with no basis in reality.

[nevermind, neoliberalism has had it 159]

The lesson of history is, Ricardo, that an unfair disproportional voting system that is fraudulent at every election, is at the heart of this society which never moves forward just rocks back and forth along the same old party political lines.And do not worry about the middle ground, the latest to be fleeced by cameron in his quest to put taxpayers money into bankers pockets.61 % are against trident, they are not all lefties. Many within the middle ground are furious with the nonchalance displayed by those who grudgingly allowed us plebs an ultimatum, called it a referendum and used taxpayers money to fund the AV campaign. What is it you admire so much in the Scots, the Irish and the welsh that you do not grant the English, Ricardo? Why do you think the English voters do not deserve the same choice of voting systems than these three union members?Tha''ts two issue in the middle ground, here''s another, rising train and bus fares when energy prices have fallen for a year and when our rail prices are the highest in Europe, financing the other ''concerns '' they have in their home countries? OK to pay over 6.400 squid to go from Kings Lynn to London for a year? Is it OK that Abelio funded the NL Rail with 1.4 bn of our sky high fares?

Finally, In just had six emails threatening libel at me from Archant, refusing to publish what I wrote above, my critic on Browns waffle, because their establishment bias and status quo mongering just can''t contemplate a change in agenda''s.Another point, why do people conflate party leaders with PM''s, who says that the party leader has to become PM? Corbyn could select/ appoint/ elect a rotational PM, a job share, should he so choose.The problem for the establishment is that they have nothing on Corbyn, not a sausage, he''s principled doesn''t gamble, smoke, take drugs, philander, ride a bicycle, it is terrible that our security service can''t ''call upon him'' as they can press gang the other stooges they have wheeled out to speak against him.Without skeletons in the cupboard, they can''t control his moves, what a change indeed.

[mrs miggins 0]

You could well be right Ricardo. I don''t know if he can appeal to enough people, but I do think it will be closer than you/other people think.

However, on the juvenile name calling, how anyone can think Liz Kendall doesn''t belong in the conservative party is beyond me, its not childish to say so (imo), and also to make out that I think anyone to the right of Burnham is a Tory is obviously wrong, though of course you have the right to your opinion.

[Herman 9,756]

Burnham is playing it reasonably well. He''s not in the desparate slagging off stage like the two women, who I feel lost the race a long time ago. It''s a two horser imo.I do find it amusing how some of the losers like David Miliband and Kinnock are telling people what to do. Makes me want to vote Corbyn out of spite.

[mrs miggins 0]

Just voted now.

Hopefully they won''t be contacting me as they so seem to be trying to rig this election

[Herman 9,756]

They''ve banned Jeremy Hardy from voting!!