The Labour Leadership Campaign

[NJS 3960]

Foot's labour were way ahead in the polls before the Falkland war.

 

Also not all marginals are like Nuneaton where a Blairite leader would admittedly have made winning more likely - for example Balls lost because of votes lost to UKIP and the greens - a galvanised labour campaign in Leeds should be able to win that seat easily.

[PaddockLad 14527]

So for you living in the UK 1997 to 2010 was the same as 2010 onwards? Is that really the case? Not in my experience like.

It wasn't for me either, but that was entirely down to the recession. I had about 12 months all told sat on my arse with no graft, and when I did get something regular it involved a 116 mile round trip to Portsmouth, where I had to clock in before 0630. But I'm not sure what that's got to do with the ethos and meaning of today's Labour Party and whether they can convince people they're fit to govern?

[ChezGiven 0]

I'm actually amazed people think there was and would be no difference between Labour and conservative. Really?

The great contradiction of Cooper etc in the last few weeks was the 'you have to be in power to change things'. Every time I heard it I wanted to scream at the telly - the only way to change things for people at the bottom of society or for those in need is to either borrow more, allocate more tax revenue to the public sector or re-allocate spending from one department to another. With the centre of the Labour Party utterly committed to austerity and Tory spending plans (the great idea that because they lost control of the economic rhetoric they can do nothing about it now), then there is no 'being in power to change things', just 'being in power'.

 

Even if Corbyn loses the leadership before the next election this will be an important journey for British politics and it's good to have someone in a leadership position in Britain who is in line with the rest of the world outside of the Euro elites on the economy. As everyone else has said, if Labour were going to lose next time anyway, there is little point in doing that from the Tory left, they may as well use this opportunity to strengthen the debate. If it destroys the party then so be it, who gives a fuck about another version of the Tory party existing or not?

 

You also (as everyone does) over estimate the role of personal beliefs of opposition leaders on their subsequent foreign policy if elected. That's not a worry for me, just look at Hollande's socialist rhetoric in opposition then subsequently aggressive foreign policy in power. I think once the responsibility of true leadership is thrust upon politicians they listen to more than just their beliefs. If you think he is unelectable due to his economic outlook though, it's irrelevant to the debate.

[Kid Dynamite 5882]

I thought he was supposed to be a Holocaust denier rather than a Holocaust supporter.

 

If you're going to smear him the accusations shouldn't contradict

He's not even a holocaust denier, he just met one once, years ago

[Happy Face 29]

I knaa... So does Ewerk

[Dr Gloom 19735]

The establishment is shaking! No it's not, it's pissing itself laughing.

 

Sorry HF is tired of comparisons with Foot, but for me the similarities are obvious, except Foot was so much more impressive and had the backing of at least some of the Westminster party. Alex is right, Corbyn will not lead the charge in 2020 anyway. Don't know who will though or of the party will still exist. Obviously time for celebration.

Don't be so quick to write him off - in Corbyn, I see a leader of the Labour party that I can vote for again, for the first time since the Iraq war. And I'm sure there are thousands like me across the country, not to mention younger voters who will finally hear a voice they recognise plus those who turned to the snp, ukip or green will be galvanised to return as they will feel their protest votes were heard.

 

This is the Labour Party's failure, not just Ed Miliband's, for failing making the argument that there is an alternative to blanket austerity and erosion of the welfare state. For buying into the Tory-led media narrative demanding that the social contract be rewritten. I'm proud to see that the Labour will return to its roots and fight the bastards on this. It's a cause worth fighting for.

[Dr Gloom 19735]

And I agree with Chez about his stance softening if he were to lead a government.

 

The one reason why people will warm to him is you can believe he means what he says when he speaks. He's not giving the typical politician's answer, sidestepping the question.

 

Plus he's a nice bloke, which counts for a lot in the UK. No one thought Major would win either but his nice bloke persona appealed to voters.

[Christmas Tree 3997]

How refreshing to have an opposition that is genuinely opposed to the government

but you haven't. You have one man with 6 MP supporters. 90% of his own side don't agree with the stuff he is saying. It's already starting to crumble.

[Happy Face 29]

[emoji38] but you haven't. You have one man with 6 MP supporters. 90% of his own side don't agree with the stuff he is saying. It's already starting to crumble.

Strange you're such a Tory when you agree with a lot of Corbyn's views that are too leftist for 90% of Labour, let alone for the conservatives.

 

One would almost think you make this shit up as you go along.

[Christmas Tree 3997]

Strange you're such a Tory when you agree with a lot of Corbyn's views that are too leftist for 90% of Labour, let alone for the conservatives.

 

One would almost think you make this shit up as you go along.

You should pay closer attention

 

I've said numerous times I would back a lot of these "lefty" type policies if they were deliverable without damaging the economy.

 

I, 90% of his own MP's and most likely the majority of the electorate realise it's pie in the sky stuff.

 

Anyone can point to stuff in the country / UK that is not ideal, the trick is being able to fix them all with the resources available.

[Gemmill 34166]

You should pay closer attention

 

I've said numerous times I would back a lot of these "lefty" type policies if they were deliverable without damaging the economy.

 

I, 90% of his own MP's and most likely the majority of the electorate realise it's pie in the sky stuff.

 

Anyone can point to stuff in the country / UK that is not ideal, the trick is being able to fix them all with the resources available.

 

They're damaging to the status quo. Which is why you get the press up in arms about them. But who outside of the 1% is content with the status quo?

 

I don't get people bemoaning the death of Labour as a socialist party, then bemoaning the appointment of a leader with socialist ideals and instead hankering for one of the Tory-lite contenders. Contenders fully intent on pursuing a slightly watered down version of what the Tories are currently doing. There's no point in them winning if that's gonna be their craic. Something like this had to happen if you want Labour to move to the left. Splits, schisms and all that comes with it - you can't have a lurch to the left without that. You might not even get it with that, but fucking hell you have to be prepared to try something radical if you want a radical change to the fucking samey shitshow that is politics in this country.

[Happy Face 29]

You should pay closer attention

 

I've said numerous times I would back a lot of these "lefty" type policies if they were deliverable without damaging the economy.

 

I, 90% of his own MP's and most likely the majority of the electorate realise it's pie in the sky stuff.

 

Anyone can point to stuff in the country / UK that is not ideal, the trick is being able to fix them all with the resources available.

Who told you it was pie in the sky CT? The economists I read say things like

 

the whole austerian ideology is based on fantasy economics, while it’s actually the anti-austerians who are basing their views on the best evidence from modern macroeconomic theory and evidence.

 

http://mobile.nytimes.com/blogs/krugman/2015/08/04/corbyn-and-the-cringe-caucus/?referrer=

[Christmas Tree 3997]

 

They're damaging to the status quo. Which is why you get the press up in arms about them. But who outside of the 1% is content with the status quo?

 

I don't get people bemoaning the death of Labour as a socialist party, then bemoaning the appointment of a leader with socialist ideals and instead hankering for one of the Tory-lite contenders. Contenders fully intent on pursuing a slightly watered down version of what the Tories are currently doing. There's no point in them winning if that's gonna be their craic. Something like this had to happen if you want Labour to move to the left. Splits, schisms and all that comes with it - you can't have a lurch to the left without that. You might not even get it with that, but fucking hell you have to be prepared to try something radical if you want a radical change to the fucking samey shitshow that is politics in this country.

They are not just damaging to the status quo, they are damaging to the poorest in the country. Labours own shadow chancellor (til yesterday), said this about Corbyns economic plans.

 

"But Shadow Chancellor Chris Leslie attacked the proposal, saying it would lead to higher inflation and interest rates, hurting the poor most".

[ChezGiven 0]

Even some Tories agree with Corbyn on the TU bill

 

http://gu.com/p/4cbhe?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other

[Gemmill 34166]

They are not just damaging to the status quo, they are damaging to the poorest in the country. Labours own shadow chancellor (til yesterday), said this about Corbyns economic plans.

 

"But Shadow Chancellor Chris Leslie attacked the proposal, saying it would lead to higher inflation and interest rates, hurting the poor most".

With respect CT, none of us know which of his ideas will make the cut, and I'm not taking economic advice on anything from you or a shadow Chancellor sniping from the sidelines on his way to the backbenches.

 

The point is that this country doesn't have to be run the way it is. There are alternatives that will leave more people better off and actually lift people out of poverty, unlike the bullshit that your lot are currently pulling. Corbyn is of a mind to pursue policies that will achieve that. The rest will pursue policies that do the opposite. I know which I'd prefer.

 

As HF pointed out, it is fucking ludicrous of you to vote Tory and paint yourself as staunch conservative and then say "I agree with a lot of what Corbyn says."

[Meenzer 13963]

Sum up the depressing state of politics in five words: "But are your principles costed?"

[Christmas Tree 3997]

Who told you it was pie in the sky CT? The economists I read say things like

 

 

 

http://mobile.nytimes.com/blogs/krugman/2015/08/04/corbyn-and-the-cringe-caucus/?referrer=

Krugmans argument and the many counter arguments have been raging since 2007 and will no doubt continue.

 

The fact that we were the best performing of the worlds largest economies last year with record levels of employment was good enough for me, the electorate, all Tory MP's and most Labour MP's.

 

Don't you think if it was as easy as Corbyn suggests, Ed Milliband etc would have jumped on it in the last 5 years?

 

Instead some would have us believe that this 66 year old veteran protestor has suddenly found the solution that everyone else missed.

 

Add to that, Krugmam is simply repeating his same argument and not actually commenting of all the ills that Jeremy thinks he can solve through quantitive easing and vast billions of unpaid taxes.

 

It sounds so much like Syrzia. Promise all sorts of goodies that can't be delivered.

[Kid Dynamite 5882]

You might as well be arguing with a horse tbh

[Renton 17610]

The great contradiction of Cooper etc in the last few weeks was the 'you have to be in power to change things'. Every time I heard it I wanted to scream at the telly - the only way to change things for people at the bottom of society or for those in need is to either borrow more, allocate more tax revenue to the public sector or re-allocate spending from one department to another. With the centre of the Labour Party utterly committed to austerity and Tory spending plans (the great idea that because they lost control of the economic rhetoric they can do nothing about it now), then there is no 'being in power to change things', just 'being in power'.

 

Even if Corbyn loses the leadership before the next election this will be an important journey for British politics and it's good to have someone in a leadership position in Britain who is in line with the rest of the world outside of the Euro elites on the economy. As everyone else has said, if Labour were going to lose next time anyway, there is little point in doing that from the Tory left, they may as well use this opportunity to strengthen the debate. If it destroys the party then so be it, who gives a fuck about another version of the Tory party existing or not?

 

You also (as everyone does) over estimate the role of personal beliefs of opposition leaders on their subsequent foreign policy if elected. That's not a worry for me, just look at Hollande's socialist rhetoric in opposition then subsequently aggressive foreign policy in power. I think once the responsibility of true leadership is thrust upon politicians they listen to more than just their beliefs. If you think he is unelectable due to his economic outlook though, it's irrelevant to the debate.

Your last paragraph could apply just as much to Burnham or Cooper as Corbyn, it's an odd argument. You're right though, my main gripe against Corbyn policy wise are his international stances, he wants us out of NATO and possibly the EU. If he doesn't intend to go through with this he needs to say so now because it will as fatal as Foot's belief in unilateral disarmament (another thing Corbyn believes in which won't win net votes).

Apart from his policy clearly there is an issue with his appearance (6th form sociology teacher) and imo his intellect.

 

You know, I'm not even sure he wants the job either.

[Christmas Tree 3997]

Even some Tories agree with Corbyn on the TU bill

 

http://gu.com/p/4cbhe?CMP=Share_iOSApp_Other

 

Hardly, Corbyn would repeal it, Davis agrees with the vast majority of it.

[Christmas Tree 3997]

Sum up the depressing state of politics in five words: "But are your principles costed?"

Quite the opposite, how principled is it to promise stuff to vulnerable people you then can't deliver.

[Happy Face 29]

Quite the opposite, how principled is it to promise stuff to vulnerable people you then can't deliver.

Better to remove any hope, not try at all and just make sure the wealthiest in society aren't asked to do something about the poor shits that will join the riots.

[Christmas Tree 3997]

Your last paragraph could apply just as much to Burnham or Cooper as Corbyn, it's an odd argument. You're right though, my main gripe against Corbyn policy wise are his international stances, he wants us out of NATO and possibly the EU. If he doesn't intend to go through with this he needs to say so now because it will as fatal as Foot's belief in unilateral disarmament (another thing Corbyn believes in which won't win net votes).

Apart from his policy clearly there is an issue with his appearance (6th form sociology teacher) and imo his intellect.

 

You know, I'm not even sure he wants the job either.

I agree with your last line. It's one thing debating in town halls with supportive audiences and your closest allies around you, but it will be another thing tomorrow night at the parliamentary labour MP meeting. I just can't see how he's going to get them onboard.

[Christmas Tree 3997]

Better to remove any hope, not try at all and just make sure the wealthiest in society aren't asked to do something about the poor shits that will join the riots.

The electorate clearly disagree.

[Happy Face 29]

The electorate clearly disagree.

The electorate haven't had the option.