You are here: Home > Message Board > News & Politics > Labour leadership contest.
October 30 2026 11.32am

This page is no longer updated, and is the old forum. For new topics visit the New HOL forum.

Labour leadership contest.


Page 2 of 10 < 1 2 3 4 5 6 >
Midlands Eagle Flag 17 Dec 19 3.51pm

Originally posted by Ghostship

of the candidates mentioned so far none of them are BAME which does surprise me

None of them are Jewish either which doesn't surprise me

 

Ghostship Flag Norfolk 17 Dec 19 4.03pm

Originally posted by Midlands Eagle

None of them are Jewish either which doesn't surprise me

I reckon it must grate on the left that Boris has two BAME people on his front bench in powerful positions. Corbyn loved a photo with BAME people in the background maybe he is indoctrinating one of those with his poison to take over.

 

Uphill Flag Bedford 17 Dec 19 4.17pm

Of the Labour MPs I have been impressed by Stephen Kinnock who is sensible, articulate and realistic.

Were he appointed as leader Labour might begin it's recovery.

Unfortunately as Momentum is not sensible or realistic
he won't get in.

But one for the future I feel.

Jess Phillips would be a good alternative from the runners and riders but she is down to earth and has a sense of humour - not qualifications in the eyes of the left wing.

I feel Emily Thornberry would be just as a turn-off as Corbyn was.

Happy days for the Tories.

 


Man and boy Palace since my first game in 1948 sitting on my dad's shoulders

Ghostship Flag Norfolk 17 Dec 19 4.21pm

Andy Burnham would be a good choice he is fairly middle ground and judging from his work in Manchester he could come up with some good ideas and policies to give Boris a challenge.

 

Yellow Card - User has been warned of conduct on the messageboards georgenorman Flag 17 Dec 19 7.19pm

I read that David Lammy is going to stand. That would be so funny - he is even more unelectable than Corbyn.

Edited by georgenorman (17 Dec 2019 7.20pm)

 

EverybodyDannsNow Flag SE19 17 Dec 19 8.00pm

Originally posted by Ghostship

Interesting to see that of the candidates mentioned so far none of them are BAME which does surprise me as I thought the left wing cared more about them than white people.

Interesting that my stereotype has not been fed so I’m going to proceed with it regardless.

 

cryrst Flag The garden of England 17 Dec 19 8.20pm

Originally posted by Matov

Accept polling released in the last couple of days (by I think Lord Ashcroft) contradicts that with Corbyn and Brexit by far the biggest deciders.

Johnson has accepted that austerity is over and the books are still not balanced. The Left has won that argument. Yes, people might have scoffed at offers of free broadband and so on (and they were utterly ludicrous) but the truth is that Johnson is signaling the turn to Keynesian economics.

Brexit and Corbyn are in many ways one and the same thing. I am tedious about it but in 2017, on the back of respecting the referendum vote, Labour did incredibly well. That was no fluke. Yes helped by a terrible campaign and May being May but still got the voters out. And in 2019, backing another referendum which they made no bones about in being heavily weighted in favour of Remain in a variety of ways get spanked. With Corbyn no longer seen as a man of principle, even if you loathed those principles.

Be wary of this narrative proclaiming the problem was Labours economic policy. A lot of people want us to think it was, from across the political spectrum, but I struggle to see that.

Corbyn was the policy.
A face,a personality.
It's natural to see this.
Hence why he is labelled as the issue and reason why voters left labour in droves.

 

Matov Flag 17 Dec 19 8.27pm

Originally posted by cryrst

Corbyn was the policy.
A face,a personality.
It's natural to see this.
Hence why he is labelled as the issue and reason why voters left labour in droves.


Except in 2017 they did not. That is the point. What changed? Corbyn was toxic then to a lot of people. It is not as though he only became chummy with Terrorists or mixed within Holocaust deniers in the last 30 months or so.

What was the primary difference between what Labour were promising in 2017 and now?

 


"The Party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command." - 1984 - George Orwell.

cryrst Flag The garden of England 17 Dec 19 8.43pm

Originally posted by Matov


Except in 2017 they did not. That is the point. What changed? Corbyn was toxic then to a lot of people. It is not as though he only became chummy with Terrorists or mixed within Holocaust deniers in the last 30 months or so.

What was the primary difference between what Labour were promising in 2017 and now?

Waspi
Broadband
30000000000000 trees
Top 5 % taxes up (hard to believe it was enough)
Time for us to work out renationalisation would cost tons.
Neutral on brexit.
3 months to get a deal.
Momentum ingress.

Some might have been there in 2017 but many wernt.

 

silvertop Flag Portishead 17 Dec 19 8.47pm

If they could elect a non-MP (like the SNP) Dan Jarvis would be the choice. Have thornberry take on boris in the house and...

Why am I wasting my time writing this? We all know they are going to select another unelectable trot beloved of the unions. I am no trad labour voter but good democracy needs effective opposition who carry the threat of taking power if the incumbent government screws up. A crypto marxist rabble with no chance of taking over no matter how bad the regime are grants full license to abuse that power with impunity.

 

Matov Flag 17 Dec 19 10.06pm

Originally posted by cryrst

Waspi
Broadband
30000000000000 trees
Top 5 % taxes up (hard to believe it was enough)
Time for us to work out renationalisation would cost tons.
Neutral on brexit.
3 months to get a deal.
Momentum ingress.

Some might have been there in 2017 but many wernt.

Interesting how you slip the Brexit issue into the middle of what is essentially just manifesto fluff.

And neutral? No. Merely unwilling to say what he felt. But Labours OFFICAL policy was to go for a second referendum with a Leave deal that the very people who would supposedly be negotiating that admitting that would be voting against it.

Utter insanity. And all in the face of a constituency map which made the majority for Leave nearer to 65 v 35 rather than 52 v 48.

Meaning that any credible new leader has to be untainted by that madness. Because otherwise it gets thrown back into their face, time and time again.

If Labour even make another election can they really afford to have the ghosts of this disastrous second referendum policy bought up again?


 


"The Party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command." - 1984 - George Orwell.

cryrst Flag The garden of England 17 Dec 19 10.40pm

Originally posted by Matov

Interesting how you slip the Brexit issue into the middle of what is essentially just manifesto fluff.

And neutral? No. Merely unwilling to say what he felt. But Labours OFFICAL policy was to go for a second referendum with a Leave deal that the very people who would supposedly be negotiating that admitting that would be voting against it.

Utter insanity. And all in the face of a constituency map which made the majority for Leave nearer to 65 v 35 rather than 52 v 48.

Meaning that any credible new leader has to be untainted by that madness. Because otherwise it gets thrown back into their face, time and time again.

If Labour even make another election can they really afford to have the ghosts of this disastrous second referendum policy bought up again?


Corbyn's decision away from their manifesto so not just slipped in for effect.
If he had not sat on the fence it would have been a party decision.
I get it all was a party manefesto but isolated him.

 

ex hibitionist Flag Hastings 17 Dec 19 11.04pm

should have been Tom Watson but he resigned owing to being unable to support the 'macabre act of self harm' that is Brexit. also got done over by the nutter who blew the whistle on the paedo ring that apparently never was - even though several previous attempts to start a judicial enquiry kept mysteriously collapsing. Nandy's not ready, Starmer is Blair mark 2, but Labour needs someone who was in favour of sticking with the 2016 result and not having a second referendum - son of Kinnock is a good shout, what the party needs to do is have a constitution like the tories have where the members do have power but the MPs can't be bypassed - I am one with Alan Johnson where momentum are concerned, as for labour's economic policy it may have been unrealistic but re-nationalisation would not cost - paying off the shareholders is offset by the income received by selling whatever service, it's a matter of efficiency after the buy back, Corbyn was wrong in his analysis of privatisation going too far, it's semi-privatisation that's the problem, monopolistic gravy trains with too much overpaid management and no accountability are inefficient and only benefit the management hierarchy - consumers and workers suffer: carillion, Oxfam, the nhs, southern rail, academies run by private firms, the list of rotten corrupt badly run semi-private orgs is endless, and bojo will make it worse, so sad there isn't a quality advocate for a mixed economy where public infrastructure lowers the costs of the private sector instead of a monstrously over-bureaucratic economy which basically eats itself.

 

Jimenez Flag SELHURSTPARKCHESTER,DA BRONX 17 Dec 19 11.12pm

Originally posted by ex hibitionist

should have been Tom Watson but he resigned owing to being unable to support the 'macabre act of self harm' that is Brexit. also got done over by the nutter who blew the whistle on the paedo ring that apparently never was - even though several previous attempts to start a judicial enquiry kept mysteriously collapsing. Nandy's not ready, Starmer is Blair mark 2, but Labour needs someone who was in favour of sticking with the 2016 result and not having a second referendum - son of Kinnock is a good shout, what the party needs to do is have a constitution like the tories have where the members do have power but the MPs can't be bypassed - I am one with Alan Johnson where momentum are concerned, as for labour's economic policy it may have been unrealistic but re-nationalisation would not cost - paying off the shareholders is offset by the income received by selling whatever service, it's a matter of efficiency after the buy back, Corbyn was wrong in his analysis of privatisation going too far, it's semi-privatisation that's the problem, monopolistic gravy trains with too much overpaid management and no accountability are inefficient and only benefit the management hierarchy - consumers and workers suffer: carillion, Oxfam, the nhs, southern rail, academies run by private firms, the list of rotten corrupt badly run semi-private orgs is endless, and bojo will make it worse, so sad there isn't a quality advocate for a mixed economy where public infrastructure lowers the costs of the private sector instead of a monstrously over-bureaucratic economy which basically eats itself.

Never done a real day's work in his life or even had a proper meaningful job. It's these sort of no marks that have truely f***ed up the Country

 


Pro USA & Israel

Matov Flag 17 Dec 19 11.41pm

Originally posted by ex hibitionist

Nandy's not ready

She does not need to be. That is the point. She has over 4 years to grow into the job.

But she has clean hands when it comes to this second referendum insanity and she is not tarnished by the Corbyn brand either. Represents a northern seat and from what I have seen of her on the TV comes accross well.

The next Labour leaders job is not about holding the Tories to account in Parliament because they can do what they want. Not even sure there is much milage in trying to hold up anything because the public seem sick to death of the usual fisticuffs.

But hitting those lost Labour seats, building up the local partys and generally trying to recapature those lost tribal votes, one by one, can make a difference.

Starmer is one of the people primarily responsible for Labour getting smashed in the way that it is and that awful Long-Bailey woman is just more of the tired old Corbynista school. Achieves nothing.

Labour are staring into an abyss at the moment and I am seeing nothing to suggest they have even fully comprehended what happened to them on Thursday. Because the leading candidates are not bright people. If they were, then they would have understood the anger out there over Brexit and their failure to honour what they pledged in 2017.

 


"The Party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command." - 1984 - George Orwell.

Rudi Hedman Flag Caterham 18 Dec 19 12.17am

Originally posted by Matov

She does not need to be. That is the point. She has over 4 years to grow into the job.

But she has clean hands when it comes to this second referendum insanity and she is not tarnished by the Corbyn brand either. Represents a northern seat and from what I have seen of her on the TV comes accross well.

The next Labour leaders job is not about holding the Tories to account in Parliament because they can do what they want. Not even sure there is much milage in trying to hold up anything because the public seem sick to death of the usual fisticuffs.

But hitting those lost Labour seats, building up the local partys and generally trying to recapature those lost tribal votes, one by one, can make a difference.

Starmer is one of the people primarily responsible for Labour getting smashed in the way that it is and that awful Long-Bailey woman is just more of the tired old Corbynista school. Achieves nothing.

Labour are staring into an abyss at the moment and I am seeing nothing to suggest they have even fully comprehended what happened to them on Thursday. Because the leading candidates are not bright people. If they were, then they would have understood the anger out there over Brexit and their failure to honour what they pledged in 2017.

From memory I thought she was a bit too soft to be leader but I think you’re right. The next few years will be pointless going in all guns blazing like Angela Rayner. She’d be defeated over and over before Johnson has had a chance to prove anything.

Lisa looked good on Newsnight tonight and I could see a lot of defectors listening to what she said, agreeing, and knowing it’s genuine.

She also sounds like she sees what’s required and knows she’s right for what they need, rather than just wanting the leadership and ending up with the wrong promotion, a problem all over the country and not just in parliament.

But I don’t think she’s particularly strong going up against Tories on panels like on QT, or doesn’t have that X factor, but 4 years is a long time and she won’t be on any panels, just PMs Q’s on Wednesdays plus a few others so lots of time to analyse and adapt.

I was impressed with her on QT and the few others who promised to honour the referendum result for their leave majorities. Glad the others were dumped on their &rses.

 


COYP

Midlands Eagle Flag 18 Dec 19 6.41am

Originally posted by ex hibitionist

Starmer is Blair mark 2,

But without the charm and charisma that Blair had in the beginning

 

Badger11 Flag Beckenham 18 Dec 19 7.57am

Originally posted by Matov

She does not need to be. That is the point. She has over 4 years to grow into the job.

But she has clean hands when it comes to this second referendum insanity and she is not tarnished by the Corbyn brand either. Represents a northern seat and from what I have seen of her on the TV comes accross well.

The next Labour leaders job is not about holding the Tories to account in Parliament because they can do what they want. Not even sure there is much milage in trying to hold up anything because the public seem sick to death of the usual fisticuffs.

But hitting those lost Labour seats, building up the local partys and generally trying to recapature those lost tribal votes, one by one, can make a difference.

Starmer is one of the people primarily responsible for Labour getting smashed in the way that it is and that awful Long-Bailey woman is just more of the tired old Corbynista school. Achieves nothing.

Labour are staring into an abyss at the moment and I am seeing nothing to suggest they have even fully comprehended what happened to them on Thursday. Because the leading candidates are not bright people. If they were, then they would have understood the anger out there over Brexit and their failure to honour what they pledged in 2017.


I'm not sure intelligence matters in their case. This is political dogmatism Corbyn and his followers will dig in and and cling onto to power irrespective of what the public think. This and their arrogance overrides their intelligence. I read a good article about Corbyn examining his life back to the seventies. He has never changed his mind on anything signifiant he and his like have feet of clay. You only have to look at the basket case that is Venezuela and still he cannot bring himself to the mildest of criticism of a government that is economically destroying their country for idealogical reasons.

 


One more point

Rudi Hedman Flag Caterham 18 Dec 19 8.11am

Originally posted by Midlands Eagle

But without the charm and charisma that Blair had in the beginning

Neither has Lisa Nandy or any of them actually. I haven’t seen any of them crack a smile I can remember, apart from Caroline Flint, and she’s not in the race or an MP because of Corbyn/Brexit or policies or the number of them, or the adding to them one after the other, after the release of the manifesto.

They haven’t had much to smile about, but if there’s no charm like the Maybot come 2024-5 then Johnson might have it easily.

 


COYP

Badger11 Flag Beckenham 18 Dec 19 8.36am

And just to back up my previous post.

Labour aide to John McDonnell just interviewed on LBC completely detached from reality. The result was irrelevant what mattered to him was that Corbyn got more votes than Blair did in 2007 (Blair's third successful election although he forgot to mention that part) he also forgot mention that the population has grown by millions since then so he is not comparing like for like.

Onto Blair he is attacking Corbyn and saying the party should listen to him. His must be showing signs of forgetfulness it does happen as we get older. Mr Blair if your so in touch with Labour voters why were you so full on Remain?

Neither Corbyn or Blair have the answer Labour need to look elsewhere.

Edited by Badger11 (18 Dec 2019 8.37am)

 


One more point

Page 2 of 10 < 1 2 3 4 5 6 >

You are here: Home > Message Board > News & Politics > Labour leadership contest.