Labour Leadership/Deputy Leadership Election thread

[Democratic Hawk]

I sure as hell won't be voting for any "lefty" for either leader or deputy

Dave

[Democratic Hawk]

Don't worry laborites. PM Cameron won't be that different from Blair.

Well on that I'm far from convinced. I'm hoping the middle ground in British politics don't buy it. No way should Cameron be getting a pass after the political equivalent of five minutes

Dave

[Democratic Hawk]

The thing I don't understand is that while Labour under Blair is, at this point in time, behind Cameron's Conservatives, the polling suggests that Cameron will be even further ahead of Labour under Brown - so I hardly think Labour malcontents baying for Blair's blood is quite the right way of going about things

It's only a matter of time before my party drives me to despair

Of course, much of the criticism can be levelled at Blair. Why the hell he said it was intention to serve a full term yet not contest the next general election, I don't know? It has served only to seriously undermine his authority

I hope for Labour's sake, the battle (i.e. public spending vs tax cuts) within the Conservative Party erupts; however, infighting within the opposition is one thing, infighting within the government is quite another

Labour basically needs a good old kick up the arse

Dave

[Democratic Hawk]

The thing I don't understand is that while Labour under Blair is, at this point in time, behind Cameron's Conservatives, the polling suggests that Cameron will be even further ahead of Labour under Brown -

Any poll of voting intentions that throws in names as well as parties isn't usually worth a lot. Note that, according to polls in the autumn of 2005, the Tories would have done worse under Cameron than under the current leadership at the time.

Well, that's reassuring

Dave

[Democratic Hawk]

The government needs a new direction, not just a new leader. I am concerned that the next year will see the government effectively paralysed

It's only paralysed because they are scrapping with one another like mad dogs

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I don't doubt for one moment that Blair's thoughtlessness is to blame for the untenable position he is increasingly finding himself

Meanwhile, back in those halcycon days of the summer of 97, I never foresaw this scenario 9 years down the line. Expectations were high and, to some extent, these expectations haven't been realised sufficiently

Were it not for Iraq and top-up tuition fees (the government have failed to sell these), I dare say Labour would have still being sitting pretty on a three-figure seat majority; though, I concede they have lost ground in places for other reasons

Nevertheless, Blair is a good man and most steps he and his government have taken have been with the best of intentions and that includes Iraq

I'm a member of the Labour Party because its values are closest to mine than those of any other UK political party, even if I have had strong reservations about certain aspects of government policy

At the end of the day, however, this infighting sickens me. In fact, it depresses me unutterably. I remember the early to mid-1980s. The thought of an unelectable Labour Party and a Conservative government terrifies me

Dave

[Democratic Hawk]

The original letter, and the names of the 17 that signed it

I won't bother. I'm depressed enough

Dave

[Democratic Hawk]

Blair is likely to announce tomorrow that he will be gone within a year.

It's a problem of his own ruddy making

Dave

[Democratic Hawk]

There are three certainties in British politics:

1) Labour are not going to be in government forever;
2) Nor will the Conservatives be after them;
3) But the Liberal Democrats ain't ever

Dave

[Democratic Hawk]

Latest polling with Brown as leader all looks rather grim . I'm genuinely undecided on the Labour leader- and deputy leadership

Dave

[Democratic Hawk]

I can make some maps if anyone wants

Go on then Al. You know you want to

[Democratic Hawk]

I hope they choose McDonnell, but I'm sure Brown would be a significant improvement over right-wing Bush lapdog Blair as well.

I won't be voting for McDonnell

Dave

[Democratic Hawk]

Just to let everyone know, I did not cast any of my votes for Ms. Harman.

She got my sixth preference, which is hardly a preference at all. I once appeared on TV critisising Harman, so I'd have thought it pretty hypocritical to have ranked her any higher

My vote was Johnson, Blears, Benn, Cruddas, Hain (don't like him personally) and Harman

As for the election itself, transfers were as follows:

All figures denote % of electoral college gained with each passing elimination

Hazel Blears' preferences were cast as follows:

MPs/MEPs: 3.39 Johnson; 0.75 Harman; 0.47 Benn; 0.29 Hain; 0.11 Cruddas
Members: 0.82 Johnson; 0.76 Harman; 0.72 Benn; 0.37 Hain; 0.34 Cruddas
Affiliated: Johnson 1.36; Harman 0.80; Benn 0.63; Cruddas 0.55; Hain 0.44

Overall: Johnson 5.58; Harman 2.30; Benn 1.82; Hain 1.10; Cruddas 1.00

Peter Hain's preferences were cast as follows:

MPs/MEPs: Cruddas 1.56; Harman 1.32; Johnson 1.31; Hain 0.91
Members: Benn 1.36; Harman 1.35; Johnson 0.96; Cruddas 0.57
Affiliated: Harman 1.97; Johnson 1.90; Benn 1.83; Cruddas 1.37

Overall: Harman 4.65; Johnson 4.16; Benn 4.11; Cruddas 3.50

Hillary Benn's preferences were cast as follows:

MPs/MEPs: Johnson 2.61; Harman 1.68; Cruddas 1.35
Members: Harman 3.67; Johnson 3.39; Cruddas 2.23
Affiliated: Cruddas 2.60; Johnson 2.44; Harman 2.34

Overall: Johnson 8.45; Harman 7.70; Cruddas 6.17

John Cruddas' preferences were cast as follows:

MPs/MEPs: Harman 5.13; Johnson 2.52
Members: Harman 5.01; Johnson 3.80
Affiliated: Johnson 6.90; Harman 6.72

Overall: Harman 16.85; Johnson 13.21

Result: Harman 33.58 + 16.85 = 50.43% / Johnson 36.35 + 13.21 = 49.56%

Well, at least, it was between a Brownite and a Blairite - and not some loony leftie polling 50.43% or 49.56% of the vote

Dave

[Democratic Hawk]

So Gordon becomes PM on Wednesday (so says Yahoo news)? 

Yep

Is it ok to be scared?

Could be worse , Phil

Brown will stand shoulder-to-shoulder with the US; Cameron, on the other hand, would wilt if he thought there was a vote or two to be had from doing so

Dave

[Democratic Hawk]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Ok, then can you draft a memo for this man.

Personally, I have nothing but praise for Howard's commitment to war in Iraq effort.  Like, with Bush, I'm probably not close to him on most other issues but I'm with him on Iraq ... er ... and .... the monarchy

Dave

[Democratic Hawk]

I thought that neither were fans of the U.S.

Brown may or may not be as fervently pro-US as Blair, but, in the grand scheme of things, the Anglo-American 'special relationship' can only endure. There is no alternative. He seems more pro-US than he is pro-EU.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I've never been turned on with him if I'm brutally honest. I'm not convinced of his sincerity. Of course, the Conservatives taking such an approach as to call for an official inquiry into the war in Iraq must irk many Republicans. It irks me

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Just as I'm predisposed towards the Democratic Party

You must be logged in to read this quote.

No, not unless Brown and Labour open-up a solid and, more importantly, sustainable double-digit lead in the opinion polls and they get all jittery. I think the Conservative lead in the polls can be attributed, to some extent, to Cameron. It's difficult to conceive of them performing better under, say, Ken Clarke, David Davis or Liam Fox

Of course, only time will tell how sustainable any 'Brown bounce' is

Signs are indicating that the Cameron 'honeymoon' is over and not before time . That said, some in the right wing press have been giving him grief for some time and this can only accelerate should the momentum move towards Brown and Labour

Of course, the European Union is certain to become an issue againand we'll have to wait and see how it factors into the political climate

Dave

[Democratic Hawk]

Brown will stand shoulder-to-shoulder with the US; Cameron, on the other hand, would wilt if he thought there was a vote or two to be had from doing so

Cameron has laid out his approach to the US in far more depth than Brown has. Standing 'shoulder to shoulder' does not mean following the US blindly on every foreign policy (even Thatcher knew that; Grenada for example) It is the duty of the British PM to protect our foreign interests and promote our own foreign policy, not make it subservient to that of the US President.

Cameron has stated he will be critical of US foreign policy when he feels it is in Britains interests. That is always preferrable to blindly following whatever comes out of the White House.

For the most part, in the precarious world we live in, the UK's national interests are synonymous with those of the US. Indeed, they have to a point put global interests, as far as the war on terror, Iraq and the wider Middle East are concerned, way beyond the petty national interests that predispose France, Germany et al

Only time will tell whether Brown's approach to the Anglo-American 'special relationship' will change significantly from that of Blair but I suspect it will remain essentially as it is, which is reassuring

Believe me there are those within the Labour Party who want more distance between the UK and the US (I'm not one of them) or George W Bush, I should say. The fact is that the Democratic Party is Labour's 'sister' party

But, at the end of the day, doing what is right matters most given that the 'special relationship' is in our national interest

Dave

[Democratic Hawk]

We have for more than half a century acted as a junior partner to the United States. Churchill, though he found it difficult, was junior partner to Roosevelt ; Margaret Thatcher to Ronald Reagan, John Major to George Bush Senior in the first Gulf war. It is not an easy part to play, but these three prime ministers learned to carry it through with skill and success.

Now that pair would have to be my favourite Anglo-American partnerhip. That's the standard to which our all prime ministers and presidents should aspire. The Reagan/Bush-Thatcher partnership achieved great things on the world stage. Credit where credit is due . That said reasoning with Gorbachev was possible, which is more than can be said for Osama bin Laden, Saddam Hussein, among others

Blair, of course, is no Churchill and Bush is no Roosevelt. Real progress can be made internationally once Bush has left office. American prestige has taken quite a whipping under him

Dave