Best Of

(((Dan Hodges)))
@DPJHodges
·
51m
The primary focus has obviously been on the Mandelson saga this week. But people are overlooking the significance of Lucy Powell securing over 100 nominations for Deputy Leader when No.10 mounted a major operation to prevent a contest. Labour MPs see it as a watershed moment.

https://x.com/DPJHodges/status/1966775524945977827

Where's his evidence that No.10 mounted a major operation to prevent a contest? A contest was inevitable. and even Starmer wouldn't have been bonkers enough to seek to prevent it.
I would imagine that No.10 is quite content that the contest is between two pretty loyal MPs.

Indeed, far from being concerned surely they're relieved that no rabble rousers made it to the members vote. Both candidates can be relied to be invisible.

I don't understand why Lucy Powell is being seen as some kind of saviour for Labour. She's completely useless and out of touch with reality. Can someone from the Labour side of the fence explain the enthusiasm for her? I understood why they were hyping up Rayner, but Powell just seems extremely middle of the road full, just like Starmer.

This misunderstands the power politics process. To stand for deputy leader in these circumstances means you are not in the top rank. Philippson stands because a minister has to and she drew the short straw. Powell stood and got the nominations not because she is any good - that's irrelevant - because she has just been sacked and both has nothing to lose and is the proxy for the 'We Want Proper Labour Not Starmer' cause.

The election is about neither candidate. If Powell wins (which she will) Starmer is certainly headed for the door. If Philippson were to win, his position is consolidated but not, I suspect, for long. Wait for the budget and the winter.

None of this begins to get close to the real problem: Starmer would like to run the economy in such a way that it doesn't crash, though he isn't good at it. Back bencher policy is to not care about the matter but to dish out for free money.

starmer and Reeves would cope if they had back benchers who can do add ups and takeaways. Same old Labour.

Your certainty that Powell will win is misplaced, I think. Phillipson is quite formidable, and is a much better speaker. There will be hustings and so on. I'd put the odds around 60:40 in Phillipson's favour at the moment.

He's not a Labour member so I don't know why he's so certain about how Labour members such as yourself will vote. Iirc 2024 was his first time voting for Labour and he's very much an outsider to the Labour party.

My read of the race is that the PM is probably pretty comfortable with either of these two winning the membership vote. Neither will offer substantial opposition nor build independent power bases, they are both middle of the road centre left, not that hard left rabble rouser who I think he actually feared making the ballot.

(((Dan Hodges)))
@DPJHodges
·
51m
The primary focus has obviously been on the Mandelson saga this week. But people are overlooking the significance of Lucy Powell securing over 100 nominations for Deputy Leader when No.10 mounted a major operation to prevent a contest. Labour MPs see it as a watershed moment.

https://x.com/DPJHodges/status/1966775524945977827

Where's his evidence that No.10 mounted a major operation to prevent a contest? A contest was inevitable. and even Starmer wouldn't have been bonkers enough to seek to prevent it.
I would imagine that No.10 is quite content that the contest is between two pretty loyal MPs.

Yes, both have been core loyal members of the team. I dont know why Powell was evicted in the reshuffle, but it might have been as simple as needing to promote fresh faces.

I think Phillipson has the harder edge. There were briefings against her about her being removed by Starmer earlier in the year, but she held on to her post and looks secure. I think Starmer is afraid of her.

(((Dan Hodges)))
@DPJHodges
·
51m
The primary focus has obviously been on the Mandelson saga this week. But people are overlooking the significance of Lucy Powell securing over 100 nominations for Deputy Leader when No.10 mounted a major operation to prevent a contest. Labour MPs see it as a watershed moment.

https://x.com/DPJHodges/status/1966775524945977827

Where's his evidence that No.10 mounted a major operation to prevent a contest? A contest was inevitable. and even Starmer wouldn't have been bonkers enough to seek to prevent it.
I would imagine that No.10 is quite content that the contest is between two pretty loyal MPs.

I would be highly surprised if Starmer falls despite the frotting from the PB faithful and the right wing media.

There have to be better operatives than Burnham in the HoC. Burnham by the way seems to be a PB faithful favourite. There is no accounting for taste.

I don't understand why Lucy Powell is being seen as some kind of saviour for Labour. She's completely useless and out of touch with reality. Can someone from the Labour side of the fence explain the enthusiasm for her? I understood why they were hyping up Rayner, but Powell just seems extremely middle of the road full, just like Starmer.

This misunderstands the power politics process. To stand for deputy leader in these circumstances means you are not in the top rank. Philippson stands because a minister has to and she drew the short straw. Powell stood and got the nominations not because she is any good - that's irrelevant - because she has just been sacked and both has nothing to lose and is the proxy for the 'We Want Proper Labour Not Starmer' cause.

The election is about neither candidate. If Powell wins (which she will) Starmer is certainly headed for the door. If Philippson were to win, his position is consolidated but not, I suspect, for long. Wait for the budget and the winter.

None of this begins to get close to the real problem: Starmer would like to run the economy in such a way that it doesn't crash, though he isn't good at it. Back bencher policy is to not care about the matter but to dish out for free money.

starmer and Reeves would cope if they had back benchers who can do add ups and takeaways. Same old Labour.

I dont think Labour party members want a civil war. They are mostly centrists and soft left now, since the exodus to Greens and Your Party.

It's not like the Tory party, which has a long repeating history of regicide.

I don't understand why Lucy Powell is being seen as some kind of saviour for Labour. She's completely useless and out of touch with reality. Can someone from the Labour side of the fence explain the enthusiasm for her? I understood why they were hyping up Rayner, but Powell just seems extremely middle of the road full, just like Starmer.

This misunderstands the power politics process. To stand for deputy leader in these circumstances means you are not in the top rank. Philippson stands because a minister has to and she drew the short straw. Powell stood and got the nominations not because she is any good - that's irrelevant - because she has just been sacked and both has nothing to lose and is the proxy for the 'We Want Proper Labour Not Starmer' cause.

The election is about neither candidate. If Powell wins (which she will) Starmer is certainly headed for the door. If Philippson were to win, his position is consolidated but not, I suspect, for long. Wait for the budget and the winter.

None of this begins to get close to the real problem: Starmer would like to run the economy in such a way that it doesn't crash, though he isn't good at it. Back bencher policy is to not care about the matter but to dish out for free money.

starmer and Reeves would cope if they had back benchers who can do add ups and takeaways. Same old Labour.

No, I'm sorry but whoever wins will have no bearing on whether Starmer stays or goes. That will fundamentally depend on how likely it is Labour will win the next election with him vs with someone else. It's also incredibly difficult for Labour to forcibly remove a sitting PM in a way that it isn't for the Tories. It took Brown 5 years of scheming and plotting to bring Blair down, it took the Tories a few weeks to bring Mrs Thatcher down.

Like it or not I think Starmer is here to stay at least until 2028 when the parties will be gearing up for a 2029 election and MPs start looking at wh is best placed to preserve their majority. Rayner may make a comeback around then.