Labour Party leadership election 2015

[Filuwaúrdjan]

The thing is, the number of people involved in far left political activity is so vanishingly small that any degree of entryism could only prove decisive if the race was already very close.

[Phony Moderate]

Btw, Rugby confirmed its reputation as an odd place the other day; the CLP nominated Corbyn for leader and Flint for deputy.

I mean, look at the electoral history: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rugby_(UK_Parliament_constituency)

[ChrisDR68]

Caroline Flint would be a good deputy leader in my opinion although it looks like Tom Watson's contest to lose right now.

Yvette Cooper as leader and Caroline Flint as deputy... you'd get old Labour fogies choking on their cornflakes if that happened!

[Phony Moderate]

Flint has sounded reasonable during this campaign in that she hasn't spent it insulting most of the party...

[Filuwaúrdjan]

The Daily Mirror is running with a 'private poll' it has been shown (but who commissioned it? Is it real? The answer to the second question is unknowable, but as to the first... ah you'll see) which purports to show the following:

Corbyn 42, Cooper 23, Burnham 20, Kendall 14

And a Corbyn/Cooper off as 51/49 to Corbyn.

Which it then proclaims (with a charming journalistic ignorance of how numbers work) that this means that Corbyn is 'storming ahead' and that he has a 'massive lead' when actually it suggests a three way who the fyck even knows state of play. Oh but the matter of who's figures these are. Well...

You must be logged in to read this quote.

...I mean I have my suspicions, don't you?

[🦀🎂🦀🎂]

https://mobile.twitter.com/corbynjokes

[Leftbehind]

https://mobile.twitter.com/corbynjokes

Love how all the Blairites usually found whingeing at being called Tories & the supposed hostility of Corbyn supporters can be found retweeting stuff like this and McTernan comments.

Although it was nice of Rentoul to admit he'd rather have had Cameron than Miliband in May last night. I mean, he's probably said that before in one of his columns. but no one can be expected to read them and this would've granted his views far more exposure. 

Speaking of interviews, Prescott has been cracking me up of late.

[politicus]

https://mobile.twitter.com/corbynjokes

"What goes black, white, black, white, black, white? History repeating itself, the first time as tragedy, the second time as farce?"

Love it!

[Zanas]

We had a similar contest here in France, the PS primary leading to the Presidential race of 2012. Concerns of entryism were expressed as well at the time, as you could pay 2€, sign a "vaguely left-wing values charter" and vote. The press were all "right-wing and/or extreme-left supporters will sign up en masse to skew the vote !!!1!1!".

In the end, it seems the people who actually voted were in fact pretty close to the PS line, no real trace of entryism or skewing could be found. I must admit that at the time I had paid those bloody 2€ to vote for Montebourg in the first round, just to show the other candidates that there were a few of us who still expected some vaguely left-wing things from them. Deception and disappointment ensued. No need to say I didn't bother choosing between Aubry and Hollande in the runoff.

And that was with quite a portion of the population confessing hard-left stances, in comparison to the UK. So that's that for your concerns of skewing. And remember that Tories love their money. 3£ can be invested and speculated... or bet, it seems, by the looks of this forum.

[Zanas]

We had a similar contest here in France, the PS primary leading to the Presidential race of 2012. Concerns of entryism were expressed as well at the time, as you could pay 2€, sign a "vaguely left-wing values charter" and vote. The press were all "right-wing and/or extreme-left supporters will sign up en masse to skew the vote !!!1!1!".

In the end, it seems the people who actually voted were in fact pretty close to the PS line, no real trace of entryism or skewing could be found. I must admit that at the time I had paid those bloody 2€ to vote for Montebourg in the first round, just to show the other candidates that there were a few of us who still expected some vaguely left-wing things from them. Deception and disappointment ensued. No need to say I didn't bother choosing between Aubry and Hollande in the runoff.

And that was with quite a portion of the population confessing hard-left stances, in comparison to the UK. So that's that for your concerns of skewing. And remember that Tories love their money. 3£ can be invested and speculated... or bet, it seems, by the looks of this forum.

[Cassius]

We had a similar contest here in France, the PS primary leading to the Presidential race of 2012. Concerns of entryism were expressed as well at the time, as you could pay 2€, sign a "vaguely left-wing values charter" and vote. The press were all "right-wing and/or extreme-left supporters will sign up en masse to skew the vote !!!1!1!".

In the end, it seems the people who actually voted were in fact pretty close to the PS line, no real trace of entryism or skewing could be found. I must admit that at the time I had paid those bloody 2€ to vote for Montebourg in the first round, just to show the other candidates that there were a few of us who still expected some vaguely left-wing things from them. Deception and disappointment ensued. No need to say I didn't bother choosing between Aubry and Hollande in the runoff.

And that was with quite a portion of the population confessing hard-left stances, in comparison to the UK. So that's that for your concerns of skewing. And remember that Tories love their money. 3£ can be invested and speculated... or bet, it seems, by the looks of this forum.

What, you don't love money too?

[Leftbehind]

I must admit that at the time I had paid those bloody 2€ to vote for Montebourg in the first round, just to show the other candidates that there were a few of us who still expected some vaguely left-wing things from them. Deception and disappointment ensued. No need to say I didn't bother choosing between Aubry and Hollande in the runoff.

I think a lot of us on the Left kidded ourselves on a bit on how much Ed would steer left (although tbh, with David being the main contender it was easy to spot the differences), so that deception and disappointment has already happened and I think largely why Burnham's (apparently) not being given the same benefit of doubt.

[SPQR]

Oh,so now the issue with Ed Miliband is that he wasn't left wing enough?

[Leftbehind]

Oh,so now the issue with Ed Miliband is that he wasn't left wing enough?

Aren't you the arch Blairite? I'm sure you can't possibly entertain the thought. Miliband didn't inspire the left anti-austerity vote, nor attract the Very Serious liberals who might be tempted not to vote Tory if given enough of a right-wing platform. In many ways hamstrung by trying to keep party unity and quite reasonably believing an unpopular Tory government, alongside splits in their right flank, could allow him to return on an offer of restraint was his undoing.

Still, this leadership campaign has shown him in a good light if anything.

[ChrisDR68]

Oh,so now the issue with Ed Miliband is that he wasn't left wing enough?

Aren't you the arch Blairite? I'm sure you can't possibly entertain the thought. Miliband didn't inspire the left anti-austerity vote, nor attract the Very Serious liberals who might be tempted not to vote Tory if given enough of a right-wing platform. In many ways hamstrung by trying to keep party unity and quite reasonably believing an unpopular Tory government, alongside splits in their right flank, could allow him to return on an offer of restraint was his undoing.

Still, this leadership campaign has shown him in a good light if anything.

Nothing to do with Ed being too left wing or not left wing enough. Voters in England simply didn't see him as of prime ministerial quality. 

That's why his ratings were always so terrible despite adopting a lot of policies that were seemingly popular with the public.

Up in Scotland the aftermath of the independence referendum bulldozed everything else out of the way and was also nothing to do with how left wing Ed was (or wasn't).

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Some more developments: Unison has endorsed Corbyn for first preference and Cooper for second, while Corbyn has stated that he now supports Britain staying in the EU.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

CLP nominations maps updated.

One thing to note: no matter the outcome (and anyone who is sure either way is a fool or is currently preparing to rig the contest) seriously left-wing economic positions have clearly returned to the Labour mainstream, like it or not.

[Blair]

Regarding the latest poll, word is that the Cooper campaign were behind it. They did this bollocks before, where they plug there numbers in so that they beat Burnham and face Corbyn. It's funny that Corbyn is set to beat David Miliband on the first ballot.

Regarding Ed Miliband being too left wing or not, the problem was that they spend too much time trying to work out what they wanted. Ed spoke at that weird 2011 anti-cuts protest, but had a luke warm connection to it. Labour's biggest problems were that voters thought we were weak on the economy, couldn't govern and were too soft on irritation and benefits. The anti-business card was thrown at labour like a wrench throughout the campaign, and clearly connected.

[🦀🎂🦀🎂]

Regarding the latest poll, word is that the Cooper campaign were behind it. They did this bollocks before, where they plug there numbers in so that they beat Burnham and face Corbyn. It's funny that Corbyn is set to beat David Miliband on the first ballot.

Regarding Ed Miliband being too left wing or not, the problem was that they spend too much time trying to work out what they wanted. Ed spoke at that weird 2011 anti-cuts protest, but had a luke warm connection to it. Labour's biggest problems were that voters thought we were weak on the economy, couldn't govern and were too soft on irritation and benefits. The anti-business card was thrown at labour like a wrench throughout the campaign, and clearly connected.

Yeah, the pro-irritating lobby really had a stranglehold on the party.

So I wonder what will happen next? There seems to be seriously bad blood forming on all sides. This has a severe danger of turning into a toxic few years, whoever wins. We can argue all day about whether Labour are too right or too left; but I think the worse thing will for the party to become one of factional bickering.

[Phony Moderate]

Quite extraordinary that Corbyn could make it while Benn and Bevan didn't.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Quite extraordinary that Corbyn could make it while Benn and Bevan didn't.

Not at all: Bevan never had a realistic chance as the leadership was decided by the PLP in those days (and also Gaitskell was one of the most formidable candidates in the history of the Labour Right), while Benn missed his window by losing his seat in 1983.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

So I wonder what will happen next? There seems to be seriously bad blood forming on all sides. This has a severe danger of turning into a toxic few years, whoever wins. We can argue all day about whether Labour are too right or too left; but I think the worse thing will for the party to become one of factional bickering.

Ben Pimlott - who understood Labour better than any other historian - pointed out that while losing an election doesn't always plunge the Party into a civil war it usually does. The one small mercy is that this is happening now and not five years ago.

[🦀🎂🦀🎂]

The other thing to consider is that the Shadow Cabinet are still elected by the PLP right? So a hypothetical Corbyn leadership surrounded by members of the technocratic soft left and the Right may be quite an interesting beast.

The other intriguing thing is which of Corbyn's policies will have to be accepted by the PLP to satisfy the membership.

[Phony Moderate]

Quite extraordinary that Corbyn could make it while Benn and Bevan didn't.

Not at all: Bevan never had a realistic chance as the leadership was decided by the PLP in those days (and also Gaitskell was one of the most formidable candidates in the history of the Labour Right), while Benn missed his window by losing his seat in 1983.

I meant more in the sense that those two were both household names while Corbyn was probably unknown to 90% of the population until the past few weeks.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

The other thing to consider is that the Shadow Cabinet are still elected by the PLP right?

No. But the SCG still has that silly self-denying ordinance from the 1980s in place which automatically removes membership from the SCG to MPs who accept frontbench posts. Not that the SCG is all that there is on the Left in the PLP (far from it), but that fact does complicate things.

Mind you, I suspect that Corbyn is intelligent enough to know that going with a factional ShadCab would be bloody stupid even if he'd presumably appoint one with an overall left lean.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

There would have to be considerable give and take on both sides. Firstly because Corbyn The Candidate is a little different to Corbyn The Backbencher (i.e. if he wins he could certainly claim an internal mandate for hard Left economic positions, but not for his other stances as he's barely mentioned them and when he has has played them down), and secondly because a serial rebel might find it hard to impose their will absolutely on the PLP.