Labour Party leadership election 2015

[afleitch]

I'm a little annoyed Chuka Umunna has withdrawn as it means I can't sing his name to the tune of 'Chucklevision'

[afleitch]

As for the child benefits issue: Limiting the credits to the first two children is something popular with the country at large. People can't see why they should have to pay for those who can't engage in proper family planning, especially if they can't afford to have three or four kids themselves.

Because the parents aren't the only people who have to live in those families, you see.

This, this, one hundred times this.

[afleitch]

If you keep having children when you can't afford the ones you already have, that's child abuse and your children should be taken away.

Financial assistance given to children has to be paid through their parent/guardian, but it is not a payment made FOR the parent; it’s paid on behalf of the child to the parent. So it’s depriving children of assistance because they happen to be ‘child 3’ or ‘child 4’. While we cannot police how that money is utilised by the parent (for good or for ill) to take it away from the child is absolutely horrific. It’s essentially saying they are worthless to the state. At least until they are old enough to pay taxes and vote. The state (same goes for the USA) actually gives comparatively little financial assistance to children as it is, preferring to throw freebies to pensioners and workers.

[afleitch]

...and John Mann literally brings paedogeddon into this.

Scottish Labour must be advising the main party PR machine these days.

[afleitch]

I was tempted to join the party for a laugh just so I could vote in this shambles.

[afleitch]

Well a simple google search ought to root you out in seconds, but that's assuming that whatever the relevant West of Scotland CLP is capable of using google...

I think at the moment my dad and a family friend at the Miner's Welfare is the entire CLP, so I was hoping for a bit of nepotism

[afleitch]

The poll also shows that Corbyn ' strength is uniform across the membership. It's not built apron the 'ten bob' members that have recently joined.

[afleitch]

I'm sure it is very painful for Mr Tony to see so many in his Party hate him so much (and I sympathise, I really do), but his interventions are not helpful.

Do you think it's safe to say that, with respect to each of their parties at similar points in their history, Blair might just might be on a 'liability par' with Thatcher?

Labour seem to be wanting that elusive cocktail of 1997-2007 (without the sociopath) yet perhaps don't grasp that this was a product of it's times and a product of the complete trashing of the Conservative brand (parties ebb and flow, but none have been trashed internally and externally before...though the Lib Dems have now reached that nadir).

Labour's hope may be in the 'missing millions'. The steep dive in turnout in 2001, which has never been given the proper analysis it deserves and is one of the damning legacies of what Blairism actually made people feel may be a better hope for Labour fortunes than going after the soft vote (which might not actually be nor have ever been that soft) of those that delivered them victory under Blair. Why think the electorate, which includes non voters actually want Burnham or Cooper over say Corbyn? Why make such broad assumptions about where Labour can get the votes to win? It's astounding. These sorts of interventions as you say don't help. They are coming from people who quite frankly, need to shut up at this moment in the party political process.

And to be so frightened of the new party members too, as if they are alien. Maybe they are. Maybe they aren't as docile, or complicit as Labour's centralising tendencies would like them to be. It's unlikely that anyone will come close to Miliband's general sh**teability, so there's no risk in offering something different.

I actually want Corybn to win. Not to destroy the party, which he won't even come close to doing, but to actually give it focus. Once you focus, others will listen.

[afleitch]

Latest ICM poll has Tories on 40 and Labour on 31. That's a bigger gap than the general election.

But not bad given that Labour have been firing into their own faces for the past three months.

[afleitch]

Worth reminding people that tomorrow we find out who gets to lead Scottish Labour until May 2016.

[afleitch]

There have been vague rumours of an upset.

I've heard that too. Kezia is the sensible choice on the basis is that she's at Holyrood, is actually not that bad at FMQ's and is also easily replaceable. Ian Murray has been rather...subtle with his 'family man' rhetoric the insinuations of which I won't go into here. If he wins, it's not clear who will lead at Holyrood where at the moment Iain Gray is doing the honours, especially if Gordon Mathieson (who's one FOI request away from trouble) gets the deputyship.

[afleitch]

What a gargantuan brain fart that was

[afleitch]

Typical Gordon.

I'd rather hear Kinnock's opinion. At last had to deal with the same sort of sh-t when he was leader.

[afleitch]

I like that Brown decides to go for a 'statesmanlike' intervention shortly after Blair goes for a petty factionalist one: why do I get the impression that at least 50% of the motivation for the style of the former was a direct response to the latter? Those two have a weird relationship...

While like some government archive, we won't quite get the full story from either of them or a third party probably until one or both are dead.

[afleitch]

Wheee!

https://archive.is/QQl5m

'Labour supporters have expressed their anger at being barred from the leadership vote, as the party steps up efforts to weed out those suspected of not being genuine supporters.
It is understood that Labour sent out a fresh batch of emails to supporters this morning informing them that their applications have been rejected and that they will not be able to vote in the leadership election.'

[afleitch]

Reds Under the Bed!

[afleitch]

Labour hasn't really focused on defining it's 'foreign policy' since decolonisation (which is the only time it was particularly forceful) When it does, you get this;



So it's no loss if it doesn't formulate one while in opposition this time round.

[afleitch]

There's quite likely to be another chance at choosing the leader for the next election anyway; he'll be 70 by 2020 and he supposedly didn't particularly want the job.

He's even gone as far as to suggest that if he's dragging Labour down in the polls then he'll go. Which is... er... unusual language for a leadership candidate.

Depends how one interprets 'low'. Labour are playing with a new normal on that one. Besides there's no where else for Labour voters to go. The mortal wounding of the Lib Dems will do them a favour there.

[afleitch]

Panorama is an attack piece tonight

[afleitch]

Keir Hardie is currently trending on Twitter.

Is that because of the anti-immigration stuff

[afleitch]

I have a little bit off topic question to the UK posters:

Is there any official reason why Labour Party changed its logo from that cool old one to the generic social democratic rose?

I mean from this one:
http://i.imgur.com/RbrgKZ9.png

To the current.

Because it's not really a logo. Remember, prior to the 70's parties didn't have universal logos or even agreed colour schemes (and in some constituencies, names)

[afleitch]

Nonce Finder General!

[afleitch]

When the police wind down that investigation initiated by a fantasist and supported by the Nonce Finder Deputy it will be quite spectacular to watch.

[afleitch]

Tom and Jerry!

[afleitch]

Watching his speech, i'm half expecting a 'Dean scream.'