I sincerely hope a latter-day Chris Mullin has been keeping an eloquent diary of both the disastrous campaign and a leadership contest which I intuit will be dirty, nasty and chock full of recrimination.
Well Brown had a coronation in 2007 so I assume you can have only one candidate.
In this occasion a dipole of Burnham and Cooper has formed with MP's, I see that the other candidates will have severe trouble getting on the ballot. Labour needs a leader that can fight the SNP effectively if it wants to get rid of the Tory-SNP card in the next election, but who can that be?
Then there is the baggage. Burnham has the NHS disaster from when he was Health secretary around his neck. Cooper has Ed Balls around her neck. The rest are even worse.
Cooper would have had the upper hand in the fight though if only she wasn't married to Balls, the guilt by association is her problem.
Looking through for an alternative and safe pair of hands I see Graham Allen though I don't know if he wants the job much less if he can win the leadership.
It seems as if there are some advantages to being one of the old guard. The whole article is comprised of one paragraph really:
"The leadership camps are keeping their levels of support private, but it is claimed Burnham and Cooper already have the support of more than 100 MPs. The Kendall camp claim to have the 35 to get on the ballot paper, but Hunt and Mary Creagh, the shadow international international development secretary, are thought to be well short. Hunt, who made no effort to organise prior to the election defeat, is starting from a long way back and has yet to declare he will stand."
I doubt Hunt will get 35 MPs; it looks like three-way contest between Burnham, Cooper, and Kendall.
Guardian readers (if CIF is anything to by) are unbelievable. Anyone who isn't a hardcore socialist a la Owen Jones is suddenly a 'neo-liberal'. Like with those who hang out the DM and Telegraph comments' section, there is no sense of middle ground; there is no sense that there are shades of grey in people's views, and that not everyone can even be pigeon-holed into 'left' or 'right'. These people are the personification of delusion; who have yet to realise the kind of agenda they pursue simply does not win elections. There is much room to critique New Labour; how, in many ways it let down many people when in government. But New Labour's hypothesis that you can only win elections in the centre-ground, and you need a good electoral machine to do so is fundamentally correct.
If Guardian readers want the Labour party to be some McClukeyite contortion, fine - but Labour will be completely powerless, carping at the sidelines in opposition without any genuine power to help many vulnerable people in our society. And these same people will be crying come election day.
What amazes me is the sheer intolerance of these people; that they actively want Liz Kendall not to be on the ballot, simply because they don't agree with her. They are the kind of people who will push Labour backwards, not forwards; who want to narrow the range of voices of those who can be a part of the Labour party. It is anything but egalitarian, or fair.
Can anyone tell me what would happen in the unlikely event that one Labour leader candidate got more than 85% of MPs' support making it impossible for another to get the minimum 15% to stand. Is there a subsidiary rule that says there must be at least two standing or could this be a way of MPs sewing up the contest without subsequent vote if they so arranged it among themselves?
Isn't that the 'Brown' strategy?
Mr Harriet Harman is a member of Unite and an exUnite official. So why be surprised at another Unite stitch up?
The CSU/CSU chose between themselves which of their leaders is the PM-elect prior to a general election.
If LAB/SLAB have a similar relationship it opens up the possibility that a particularly impressive leader of Scottish Labour could be put forward as PM of the UK. If Labour were led by Burnham, and Scottish Labour were led by Gordon Brown, more than a few might prefer the original.
Labour's worst result was probably in Gower, and it's interesting that the Labour selection there was the one where everyone was struggling to find out any information about the candidate. It was also the occasion on which Andrea was mentioned by Michael Crick:
This election was the Tories best election result in Wales since 1983 (where they got 14 seats) and matched the 1979 result where they also got 11 seats.
If Guardian readers want the Labour party to be some McClukeyite contortion, fine - but Labour will be completely powerless, carping at the sidelines in opposition without any genuine power to help many vulnerable people in our society. And these same people will be crying come election day.
What amazes me is the sheer intolerance of these people; that they actively want Liz Kendall not to be on the ballot, simply because they don't agree with her. They are the kind of people who will push Labour backwards, not forwards; who want to narrow the range of voices of those who can be a part of the Labour party. It is anything but egalitarian, or fair.
I know. Isn't it grand?
Why don't Labour and Unite just merge?
They could themselves LabourUnite. Or just....Unite.
Secondly, isn’t there usually a Dissolution Honours List, in which various defeated MP’s get sent to the Lords? When do we expect that and who do we expect to be on that list. Or not, as the case may be.
Personally, I would be surprised if Vince Cable accepted a peerage. Simon Hughes might be a different matter.
For all the push from the Tories for Liz Kendall, does she even have 35 MP's to be on the ballot?
Liz Kendall is the last person on the list that the Conservative party want to win. The reality is that she does have appeal to some conservative voters on here and elsewhere. Good job that redLen may deny her that chance.
Can anyone tell me what would happen in the unlikely event that one Labour leader candidate got more than 85% of MPs' support making it impossible for another to get the minimum 15% to stand. Is there a subsidiary rule that says there must be at least two standing or could this be a way of MPs sewing up the contest without subsequent vote if they so arranged it among themselves?
Isn't that the 'Brown' strategy?
I suppose it is. I was just exploring the idea further to see if the MPs could, even though several want to stand, to agree the outcome based on their own votes beforehand and then by swinging behind the leading candidate get round member voting potentially going against their majority wishes. But I guess it would fall on the impossible achievement of at least 85% of Labour MPs ever agreeing between themselves!
Amazingly this is the first time I have been allowed to post here using my windows 8 phone. Still cant post using my iPad. Has anyone got a solution? Ps as a fully paid up labourite my instinct at the moment us to go for one of the women candidates. Cooper may be a bit too close to Balls(so to speak) but ii have an open mind on the other two female candidates. May invite them to dinner to see how they perform.
I couldn't post with the iPad until I was told to seatch for Politicabetting.vanillaforums.com and access the thread that way, which seems to work (as this post during work hours indicates).
Re Lab leader contest, I recall that I thought Burnham was the best best of the bunch 5 years ago, although I certainly cannot remember what he said or how I got that impression.
Being neither an Ed nor a Miliband probably helped.
It seems as if there are some advantages to being one of the old guard. The whole article is comprised of one paragraph really:
"The leadership camps are keeping their levels of support private, but it is claimed Burnham and Cooper already have the support of more than 100 MPs. The Kendall camp claim to have the 35 to get on the ballot paper, but Hunt and Mary Creagh, the shadow international international development secretary, are thought to be well short. Hunt, who made no effort to organise prior to the election defeat, is starting from a long way back and has yet to declare he will stand."
I doubt Hunt will get 35 MPs; it looks like three-way contest between Burnham, Cooper, and Kendall.
Guardian readers (if CIF is anything to by) are unbelievable. Anyone who isn't a hardcore socialist a la Owen Jones is suddenly a 'neo-liberal'. Like with those who hang out the DM and Telegraph comments' section, there is no sense of middle ground; there is no sense that there are shades of grey in people's views, and that not everyone can even be pigeon-holed into 'left' or 'right'. These people are the personification of delusion; who have yet to realise the kind of agenda they pursue simply does not win elections. There is much room to critique New Labour; how, in many ways it let down many people when in government. But New Labour's hypothesis that you can only win elections in the centre-ground, and you need a good electoral machine to do so is fundamentally correct.
If Guardian readers want the Labour party to be some McClukeyite contortion, fine - but Labour will be completely powerless, carping at the sidelines in opposition without any genuine power to help many vulnerable people in our society. And these same people will be crying come election day.
What amazes me is the sheer intolerance of these people; that they actively want Liz Kendall not to be on the ballot, simply because they don't agree with her. They are the kind of people who will push Labour backwards, not forwards; who want to narrow the range of voices of those who can be a part of the Labour party. It is anything but egalitarian, or fair.
Tolerance of the opinions of others is, sadly, not in much demand in some dangerously influential places, rather than merely being contained to the fettid depths of the internet.
It seems I made the silly mistake of assuming that if they need 35 signatures to be nominated, then the nomination form should contain 35 boxes for those signatures.
What's the point of allowing 100 members to nominate someone, apart from keeping others out of the ballot? And maybe letting the 100 show the new leader that they're loyal to him or her?
If they can't get 15% of their colleagues to think that they are the best choice, they're probably not the best choice to lead them.
Of course, those un-nominated candidates might be more electable to the country at large, but perhaps the party needs another brick to the head before it realises that...
For all the push from the Tories for Liz Kendall, does she even have 35 MP's to be on the ballot?
Liz Kendall is the last person on the list that the Conservative party want to win. The reality is that she does have appeal to some conservative voters on here and elsewhere. Good job that redLen may deny her that chance.
She would do well to mount a pre emptive strike on Len personally.
Secondly, isn’t there usually a Dissolution Honours List, in which various defeated MP’s get sent to the Lords? When do we expect that and who do we expect to be on that list. Or not, as the case may be.
Personally, I would be surprised if Vince Cable accepted a peerage. Simon Hughes might be a different matter.
Both have said they wouldn't take a peerage, as has Danny Alexander.
Amazingly this is the first time I have been allowed to post here using my windows 8 phone. Still cant post using my iPad. Has anyone got a solution? Ps as a fully paid up labourite my instinct at the moment us to go for one of the women candidates. Cooper may be a bit too close to Balls(so to speak) but ii have an open mind on the other two female candidates. May invite them to dinner to see how they perform.
I couldn't post with the iPad until I was told to seatch for Politicabetting.vanillaforums.com and access the thread that way, which seems to work (as this post during work hours indicates).
Re Lab leader contest, I recall that I thought Burnham was the best best of the bunch 5 years ago, although I certainly cannot remember what he said or how I got that impression.
Being neither an Ed nor a Miliband probably helped.
Good point. I don't recall what I thought about the Milibands, which I suppose tells its own story, and Abbot should not even have been there, requiring others to pull out to get her nominations to be there purely because of her gender, Ed Balls is, well, Ed Balls, so Andy appealed by default I guess.
If Guardian readers want the Labour party to be some McClukeyite contortion, fine - but Labour will be completely powerless, carping at the sidelines in opposition without any genuine power to help many vulnerable people in our society. And these same people will be crying come election day.
What amazes me is the sheer intolerance of these people; that they actively want Liz Kendall not to be on the ballot, simply because they don't agree with her. They are the kind of people who will push Labour backwards, not forwards; who want to narrow the range of voices of those who can be a part of the Labour party. It is anything but egalitarian, or fair.
I know. Isn't it grand?
Why don't Labour and Unite just merge?
They could themselves LabourUnite. Or just....Unite.
In this occasion a dipole of Burnham and Cooper has formed with MP's, I see that the other candidates will have severe trouble getting on the ballot.
And this problem is structural, because the PLP is leftier than ever, more infested with tokenism than ever, and more owned by Unite than ever. So when they elect a total dud who is patently bombing by 2018, the removal and replacement of the that dud will be at the behest of the same nutters.
As The_Apocalypse has articulated, there are people "who want to narrow the range of voices of those who can be a part of the Labour party" and a lot of these in the PLP would rather lose under Ed than win under David - inshallah.
If MPs conspire to keep Creagh and Hunt off the ballot it would be another slap in the face to members who will be denied a full choice of candidates. If no more than 6 want to stand, they should all get through on the nod, since 6 x 15% = 90% with 10% nominating MPs to spare.
If you're going to bother to have an MP nominating stage then it should be worthwhile. If a prospective MP can't find the support of 15% of their peers then it suggests they are not up to much.
Otherwise you may as well open up the election to any MP who wants to put themselves forward, and forget about the MP nomination stage entirely.
As I suggested, the MP nomination stage would kick in if there were more than 6 potential candidates. One candidate Hoovering up all of the nominations (e.g. Brown) to keep others off the ballot is not a great example of democracy.
It seems I made the silly mistake of assuming that if they need 35 signatures to be nominated, then the nomination form should contain 35 boxes for those signatures.
What's the point of allowing 100 members to nominate someone, apart from keeping others out of the ballot? And maybe letting the 100 show the new leader that they're loyal to him or her?
Secondly, isn’t there usually a Dissolution Honours List, in which various defeated MP’s get sent to the Lords? When do we expect that and who do we expect to be on that list. Or not, as the case may be.
Personally, I would be surprised if Vince Cable accepted a peerage. Simon Hughes might be a different matter.
Both have said they wouldn't take a peerage, as has Danny Alexander.
Hmmm. I know Cable’s going to write another book. Hughes could retire but Alexander’s far too young. Kennedy?
Labour's worst result was probably in Gower, and it's interesting that the Labour selection there was the one where everyone was struggling to find out any information about the candidate. It was also the occasion on which Andrea was mentioned by Michael Crick:
This election was the Tories best election result in Wales since 1983 (where they got 14 seats) and matched the 1979 result where they also got 11 seats.
Now who thought it was a good idea for Labour to make an election about the NHS ... in Wales?
Secondly, isn’t there usually a Dissolution Honours List, in which various defeated MP’s get sent to the Lords? When do we expect that and who do we expect to be on that list. Or not, as the case may be.
Personally, I would be surprised if Vince Cable accepted a peerage. Simon Hughes might be a different matter.
In this occasion a dipole of Burnham and Cooper has formed with MP's, I see that the other candidates will have severe trouble getting on the ballot.
And this problem is structural, because the PLP is leftier than ever, more infested with tokenism than ever, and more owned by Unite than ever. So when they elect a total dud who is patently bombing by 2018, the removal and replacement of the that dud will be at the behest of the same nutters.
As The_Apocalypse has articulated, there are people "who want to narrow the range of voices of those who can be a part of the Labour party" and a lot of these in the PLP would rather lose under Ed than win under David - inshallah.
Come back Peter Mandelson, all is forgiven? Mind you, even Jesus will only manage two comebacks.
To be fair, I heard him on (I think) John Pienaar a couple of weeks ago and he was pretty eloquent about Labour's failings - especially on economics.
If Guardian readers want the Labour party to be some McClukeyite contortion, fine - but Labour will be completely powerless, carping at the sidelines in opposition without any genuine power to help many vulnerable people in our society. And these same people will be crying come election day.
What amazes me is the sheer intolerance of these people; that they actively want Liz Kendall not to be on the ballot, simply because they don't agree with her. They are the kind of people who will push Labour backwards, not forwards; who want to narrow the range of voices of those who can be a part of the Labour party. It is anything but egalitarian, or fair.
I know. Isn't it grand?
Why don't Labour and Unite just merge?
They could themselves LabourUnite. Or just....Unite.
"The candidates for the Labour leadership are coming forward. And two things are clear. The first is that they are all former special advisers, or spads. The only exception to this is Mary Creagh. And she was the leader of the Labour group on Islington council (which some people might say is the next best thing). What’s also remarkable is that they all come from one wing of the Labour party. Not a single one of the current candidates opposed the Iraq war, not a single one supports taking back the railways into public ownership, not a single one opposes “austerity-lite” and not a single one opposes the welfare cap."
The Labour mind is nothing but clutter. It is geared for analysis over judgment. Five summers ago, a decisive number of people in the party thought Mr Miliband was a plausible prime minister. These individuals are still allowed to handle flammable liquids and walk our streets unescorted. Some of them are in the shadow cabinet and likely to be promoted. Labour, the party of clever fools, will seemingly excuse any misjudgment, however catastrophic, if it is backed up by exhaustive analysis.
"The candidates for the Labour leadership are coming forward. And two things are clear. The first is that they are all former special advisers, or spads. The only exception to this is Mary Creagh. And she was the leader of the Labour group on Islington council (which some people might say is the next best thing). What’s also remarkable is that they all come from one wing of the Labour party. Not a single one of the current candidates opposed the Iraq war, not a single one supports taking back the railways into public ownership, not a single one opposes “austerity-lite” and not a single one opposes the welfare cap."
Greater London: +3.36% North West: +2.84% Yorkshire & the Humber: +2.52% North East: +0.87% South East: +0.54% Eastern: +0.25% Wales: +0.25% West Midlands: +0.04% East Midlands: -0.20% South West: -0.71% Scotland: -7.94%
Its the East Mids wot lost it!
The M1 corridor is our very own Ohio.
I have a soft spot for that area. South Notts/North Leicestershire is a lovely part of the world, especially around the vale of Belvoir.
Derby North was the only seat changing hands in the region. I think Chris Williamson was a bit too left-wing even for a left of centre constituency.
Corby is in the East Midlands and after the by election in 2012 we regained the seat with Tom Pursglove obtaining a sensational 13% Lab to Con swing! It always felt good on the ground and while you always play that carefully, the result spoke for itself...
Turnout was poor overall, up just 1 point from 2005. That was always going to hit Labour chances in seats like Corby where they rely on getting the vote out in the main town to defeat the Tory rural areas.
If Guardian readers want the Labour party to be some McClukeyite contortion, fine - but Labour will be completely powerless, carping at the sidelines in opposition without any genuine power to help many vulnerable people in our society. And these same people will be crying come election day.
What amazes me is the sheer intolerance of these people; that they actively want Liz Kendall not to be on the ballot, simply because they don't agree with her. They are the kind of people who will push Labour backwards, not forwards; who want to narrow the range of voices of those who can be a part of the Labour party. It is anything but egalitarian, or fair.
I know. Isn't it grand?
Why don't Labour and Unite just merge?
They could themselves LabourUnite. Or just....Unite.
The left kick off about the 'swivel-eyed' wing of the Tory party, yet take heed of a Union which has apologists for Stalin in its hierarchy.
To me there is a distinct moral difference between a right-winger who dislikes the EU and is squeamish about immigration and a left-winger who thinks the systematic slaughter of thousands of political opponents was acceptable as long as it pissed America off.
If Guardian readers want the Labour party to be some McClukeyite contortion, fine - but Labour will be completely powerless, carping at the sidelines in opposition without any genuine power to help many vulnerable people in our society. And these same people will be crying come election day.
What amazes me is the sheer intolerance of these people; that they actively want Liz Kendall not to be on the ballot, simply because they don't agree with her. They are the kind of people who will push Labour backwards, not forwards; who want to narrow the range of voices of those who can be a part of the Labour party. It is anything but egalitarian, or fair.
I know. Isn't it grand?
Why don't Labour and Unite just merge?
They could themselves LabourUnite. Or just....Unite.
It's not grand for me; if Labour decide to go for the Miliband continuity candidate, Burnham then that's me spoiling my ballot paper in 2020. Well, unless the LDs under Farron produce something decent.
Tolerance of the opinions of others is, sadly, not in much demand in some dangerously influential places, rather than merely being contained to the fettid depths of the internet.
Secondly, isn’t there usually a Dissolution Honours List, in which various defeated MP’s get sent to the Lords? When do we expect that and who do we expect to be on that list. Or not, as the case may be.
Personally, I would be surprised if Vince Cable accepted a peerage. Simon Hughes might be a different matter.
So both Beith and his wife will be in the Lords. Should save on expenses! (I know)
Secondly, isn’t there usually a Dissolution Honours List, in which various defeated MP’s get sent to the Lords? When do we expect that and who do we expect to be on that list. Or not, as the case may be.
Personally, I would be surprised if Vince Cable accepted a peerage. Simon Hughes might be a different matter.
So both Beith and his wife will be in the Lords. Should save on expenses! (I know)
Labour's worst result was probably in Gower, and it's interesting that the Labour selection there was the one where everyone was struggling to find out any information about the candidate. It was also the occasion on which Andrea was mentioned by Michael Crick:
The Gower was only a surprise, not a shock. It has been constantly trending away from Labour since 97, when the retiring MP Martin Caton was first elected. Labour's share of the vote has been:
Down by a third. CCHQ clocked this - it sent the BattleBus down there for a day. It is quite possible that the 1,500 or so extra voter "conversations" this would have generated could have found enough "maybe's" to tip it over into the Blue column with a majority of 27.
Secondly, isn’t there usually a Dissolution Honours List, in which various defeated MP’s get sent to the Lords? When do we expect that and who do we expect to be on that list. Or not, as the case may be.
Personally, I would be surprised if Vince Cable accepted a peerage. Simon Hughes might be a different matter.
So both Beith and his wife will be in the Lords. Should save on expenses! (I know)
Are there any other married couples in the Lords?
Sir Geoffrey and Elspeth Howe are both peers in their own right.
Secondly, isn’t there usually a Dissolution Honours List, in which various defeated MP’s get sent to the Lords? When do we expect that and who do we expect to be on that list. Or not, as the case may be.
Personally, I would be surprised if Vince Cable accepted a peerage. Simon Hughes might be a different matter.
So both Beith and his wife will be in the Lords. Should save on expenses! (I know)
Mr. Antifrank, I wonder if male spouses of peers will end up getting a sort-of title, the way the wife of a knight or lord is Lady Marriedwell. Not sure how it works with gay couples either. Hmm.
Labour's worst result was probably in Gower, and it's interesting that the Labour selection there was the one where everyone was struggling to find out any information about the candidate. It was also the occasion on which Andrea was mentioned by Michael Crick:
The Gower was only a surprise, not a shock. It has been constantly trending away from Labour since 97, when the retiring MP Martin Caton was first elected. Labour's share of the vote has been:
Down by a third. CCHQ clocked this - it sent the BattleBus down there for a day. It is quite possible that the 1,500 or so extra voter "conversations" this would have generated could have found enough "maybe's" to tip it over into the Blue column with a majority of 27.
I'd suggest Vale of Clwyd was more surprising as the Labour MP wasn't standing down there.
Labour's worst result was probably in Gower, and it's interesting that the Labour selection there was the one where everyone was struggling to find out any information about the candidate. It was also the occasion on which Andrea was mentioned by Michael Crick:
The Gower was only a surprise, not a shock. It has been constantly trending away from Labour since 97, when the retiring MP Martin Caton was first elected. Labour's share of the vote has been:
Down by a third. CCHQ clocked this - it sent the BattleBus down there for a day. It is quite possible that the 1,500 or so extra voter "conversations" this would have generated could have found enough "maybe's" to tip it over into the Blue column with a majority of 27.
I'd suggest Vale of Clwyd was more surprising as the Labour MP wasn't standing down there.
Especially as nearby Chester was gained by Labour.
Gower was not a surprise. It was tipped on here by both myself and Marquee Mark.
The former MP Martin Caton was standing down, the Conservative candidate Byron Davies was well-known (he is an AM for that region) and the constituency has long been trending Tory.
The Vale of Clwyd was more of a surprise, as Chris Ruane was perceived as a good constituency MP (though I think he did recently run into expenses trouble & that may have been what did him in).
Presumably the Welsh constituencies will be completely different next time. There is probably no way of extending Gower constituency into Llanelli or Swansea West & maintaining a Tory majority.
'Was it only two weeks ago she had all but given up?..'
No at least two years ago, all those red Lib Dems switching en masse to our Nick , confirmed by his numerous canvass returns and the fact that everyone had made their minds up and nothing was going to change them.
The left kick off about the 'swivel-eyed' wing of the Tory party, yet take heed of a Union which has apologists for Stalin in its hierarchy.
To me there is a distinct moral difference between a right-winger who dislikes the EU and is squeamish about immigration and a left-winger who thinks the systematic slaughter of thousands of political opponents was acceptable as long as it pissed America off.
"Thousands"? Better part of a million, with some estimates ranging well above that mark.
"PRESSURE is mounting for Scottish Labour to consider becoming fully independent from the UK Labour Party after Andy Burnham, the frontrunner to succeed Ed Miliband as party leader, said there was "a case" for such a move."
By the way I don't know if anyone else noticed the article on Mr Murray in the Herald at the weekend:
"For years, the Tories and LibDems broadly dominated the former and Labour the latter, creating a three-way marginal in which the Nats barely registered. In 2010, local Labour councillor Ian Murray squeaked in just 316 votes ahead of the LibDems, while the SNP recorded their lowest vote in Scotland, 7.7 per cent.
Murray's was Labour's smallest Scottish majority, but a blessing in disguise. Unlike MPs in 'weight the vote' seats, Murray knew he had to graft from day one. He held his first surgery five hours after getting elected, and never really stopped. He held more surgeries than any other MP in the country, some 800, offered all 36,500 households a home visit, put 8000 constituents on his monthly mailing list, and assembled a team of staff and activists with the same Stakhanovite work ethic. In his spare time, he became chair of Foundation of Hearts, the not-for-profit supporters group set up to buy Hearts FC after its administration. Even his opponents concede he is diligent and conscientious."
If SLAB became a distinct separate body , like the SDLP, and as long as the UK exists, what practical difference would there be ?
OK , there would be a different manifesto. If Labour is in power, technically, a coalition.
It will be like the CDU / CSU.
Indeed, but the question them becomes whether the two (Lab/SLAB) might diverge in policies. For one thing, if a leftie takes over in Scotland, that's one area of difference, even if SLAB remains a unionist party. And that last is not given. There's (AFAIK) no serious suggestion that the Land of Bayern should depart the Bundesrepublik, so that comparison is not entirely complete.
' Not a single one of the current candidates opposed the Iraq war, not a single one supports taking back the railways into public ownership, not a single one opposes “austerity-lite” and not a single one opposes the welfare cap."
Can't understand why Diane Abbott doesn't go for it and then she can personally see how popular that stuff is with her colleagues.
The left kick off about the 'swivel-eyed' wing of the Tory party, yet take heed of a Union which has apologists for Stalin in its hierarchy.
To me there is a distinct moral difference between a right-winger who dislikes the EU and is squeamish about immigration and a left-winger who thinks the systematic slaughter of thousands of political opponents was acceptable as long as it pissed America off.
"Thousands"? Better part of a million, with some estimates ranging well above that mark.
The left kick off about the 'swivel-eyed' wing of the Tory party, yet take heed of a Union which has apologists for Stalin in its hierarchy.
To me there is a distinct moral difference between a right-winger who dislikes the EU and is squeamish about immigration and a left-winger who thinks the systematic slaughter of thousands of political opponents was acceptable as long as it pissed America off.
"Thousands"? Better part of a million, with some estimates ranging well above that mark.
I was arguing with some lefties on Facebook the other day (they'd posted a link to Polly T, of all people) about being able to see past your prejudices. There is a suspicion on the left that Tories are ideologues who only care about the rich, and there is a suspicion on the right that the Unions bosses would wreak serious damage on British business if they got their hands on the tiller.
In my opinion people like McCluskey* should be more feared than, say, a John Redwood. And I suspect that many more centrists fear the Union bosses more than they do the Tory right wingers (and rightly so).
This was borne out by the election result.
*Some of the people around McCluskey and the late Bob Crow are/were nasty pieces of work. Far more ideological than any right wing Tories are.
Paul Kenny of the GMB said the party could not fight a general election without donations from unions such as his and Len McCluskey’s Unite.
“The Labour Party, if we pulled out, would be bankrupt,” he told BBC radio. “If you took away the support of affiliated unions financially then it would be difficult to see how the Labour Party would fight a general election.”
His comment was seen as a rebuff to MPs who have hit out at the influence of Mr McCluskey, who helped to force the resignation of defeated Scottish Labour leader Jim Murphy.
Mr Kenny said: “If we are going to have bloodletting, it’s better to do it now rather than in two years.”
I don't see why we shouldn't look forward to bloodletting now as well as in two years' time.
Thanks to Philip Thompson who advised on how I could access this site via my ipad. Something i had failed to do for months! Wales was a massive disappointment for us Labourites, but previous elections that we follow in England with the trend. All credit to our opponents who clearly fought a cleverer campaign. Gower is the posh part of Swansea and it perhaps not too much of a surprise, on reflection, that the Tories sneaked in. Vale of Clwyd was perhaps a little different in so much as the hospital was a big issue there and the Tory winner is a GP. Cameron's constant attacks of the Welsh NHS certainly bore fruit there. I worry about next years Assembly elections I can see Labour getting a hiding from all sides, including UKIP who are establishing a presence in the Valleys.
On Vale of Clwyd, Jamie Davies is a friend of a friend and did some phoning for him in the final week and seemed quite positive, he is from the seat and was brought up and educated there too which helped, as perhaps did some Labour voters moving to UKIP
Thanks to Philip Thompson who advised on how I could access this site via my ipad. Something i had failed to do for months! Wales was a massive disappointment for us Labourites, but previous elections that we follow in England with the trend. All credit to our opponents who clearly fought a cleverer campaign. Gower is the posh part of Swansea and it perhaps not too much of a surprise, on reflection, that the Tories sneaked in. Vale of Clwyd was perhaps a little different in so much as the hospital was a big issue there and the Tory winner is a GP. Cameron's constant attacks of the Welsh NHS certainly bore fruit there. I worry about next years Assembly elections I can see Labour getting a hiding from all sides, including UKIP who are establishing a presence in the Valleys.
What's going on in Wrexham Valleyboy?
That should be rock solid Labour but the Tories are only 1800 votes behind now. 2020 could see Chester go Labour and Wrexham go Tory, that'd be quite something.
The Right Honourable Michael Andrew Gove MP will be sworn in as Lord High Chancellor of Great Britain tomorrow at 12.45 pm at the Royal Courts of Justice, before Lord Thomas of Cwmgiedd CJ, Lord Neuberger of Abbotsbury PSC, Lord Dyson MR, Sir James Munby P and Sir Terence Etherton C. His predecessor will not be missed.
Thanks to Philip Thompson who advised on how I could access this site via my ipad. Something i had failed to do for months! Wales was a massive disappointment for us Labourites, but previous elections that we follow in England with the trend. All credit to our opponents who clearly fought a cleverer campaign. Gower is the posh part of Swansea and it perhaps not too much of a surprise, on reflection, that the Tories sneaked in. Vale of Clwyd was perhaps a little different in so much as the hospital was a big issue there and the Tory winner is a GP. Cameron's constant attacks of the Welsh NHS certainly bore fruit there. I worry about next years Assembly elections I can see Labour getting a hiding from all sides, including UKIP who are establishing a presence in the Valleys.
What would Labour need to do to hold on to power next year in the assembly? What vision of a future successful Wales is there?
Or is it going to be chickens coming home to roost?
Thanks to Philip Thompson who advised on how I could access this site via my ipad. Something i had failed to do for months! Wales was a massive disappointment for us Labourites, but previous elections that we follow in England with the trend. All credit to our opponents who clearly fought a cleverer campaign. Gower is the posh part of Swansea and it perhaps not too much of a surprise, on reflection, that the Tories sneaked in. Vale of Clwyd was perhaps a little different in so much as the hospital was a big issue there and the Tory winner is a GP. Cameron's constant attacks of the Welsh NHS certainly bore fruit there. I worry about next years Assembly elections I can see Labour getting a hiding from all sides, including UKIP who are establishing a presence in the Valleys.
What's going on in Wrexham Valleyboy?
That should be rock solid Labour but the Tories are only 1800 votes behind now. 2020 could see Chester go Labour and Wrexham go Tory, that'd be
UkIP is a problem in Wrexham as it is in some other parts of Wales. Labour has to find a way of counteracting them.
Does anyone know who, aside from Gordon Brown, was the last university educated Prime Minister who did not go to Oxford?
I only ask because looking at the list of Labour Leader candidates only two (Cooper and Burnham) went to Oxford (the other three are Cambridge graduates).
Does anyone know who, aside from Gordon Brown, was the last university educated Prime Minister who did not go to Oxford?
I only ask because looking at the list of Labour Leader candidates only two (Cooper and Burnham) went to Oxford (the other three are Cambridge graduates).
Does anyone know who, aside from Gordon Brown, was the last university educated Prime Minister who did not go to Oxford?
I only ask because looking at the list of Labour Leader candidates only two (Cooper and Burnham) went to Oxford (the other three are Cambridge graduates).
Does anyone know who, aside from Gordon Brown, was the last university educated Prime Minister who did not go to Oxford?
I only ask because looking at the list of Labour Leader candidates only two (Cooper and Burnham) went to Oxford (the other three are Cambridge graduates).
Baldwin (Trinity, Cambridge)?
Brown was of course also only the 2nd PM who went to university but not Oxbridge - the only other one being Henry John Temple, Viscount Palmerston (coincidentally, he also went to Edinburgh, but a fair while before Brown...).
Does anyone know who, aside from Gordon Brown, was the last university educated Prime Minister who did not go to Oxford?
I only ask because looking at the list of Labour Leader candidates only two (Cooper and Burnham) went to Oxford (the other three are Cambridge graduates).
Your whisky is on its way, could be delivered anytime in the next couple of weeks. I haven't used the company before and they do not seem very speedy...
''Cameron's constant attacks of the Welsh NHS certainly bore fruit there.''The locals believed Cameron's attacks over their own experiences of the superb NHS of Wales? Wales is going tory because labour's tutelage has been a catastrophe, and not because of anything David Cameron said. UKIP is picking up the votes of those who are completely fed up of labour, but cannot bring themselves to vote tory.
Labour tory hating kippers are willing to share a party with tory defects like Hamilton? Willing to vote for a party led by a public school educated velvet collared commodities trader? Funny old world if that's true.
Does anyone know who, aside from Gordon Brown, was the last university educated Prime Minister who did not go to Oxford? I only ask because looking at the list of Labour Leader candidates only two (Cooper and Burnham) went to Oxford (the other three are Cambridge graduates).
Baldwin (Trinity, Cambridge)?
Brown was of course also only the 2nd PM who went to university but not Oxbridge - the only other one being Henry John Temple, Viscount Palmerston (coincidentally, he also went to Edinburgh, but a fair while before Brown...).
@ScottyNational: Westminster : SNP MPs start their opposition to Tories in Westminster by having an argument with the famously right wing Dennis Skinner
Skinner voted in favour of the 40% rule for the '79 referendum so there is no love lost there.
There's a direct causal line from the gerrymandering of the '79 devo ref to the 56 SNP MPs trying to nick Skinner's bench spot now.
Does anyone know who, aside from Gordon Brown, was the last university educated Prime Minister who did not go to Oxford?
I only ask because looking at the list of Labour Leader candidates only two (Cooper and Burnham) went to Oxford (the other three are Cambridge graduates).
Baldwin (Trinity, Cambridge)?
Churchill was at Cambridge.
Surely not. Didn't he go straight from Harrow to Sandhurst?
Does anyone know who, aside from Gordon Brown, was the last university educated Prime Minister who did not go to Oxford?
I only ask because looking at the list of Labour Leader candidates only two (Cooper and Burnham) went to Oxford (the other three are Cambridge graduates).
Baldwin (Trinity, Cambridge)?
Churchill was at Cambridge.
Really? I know he had a college named after him, but... Thought he was at Sandhurst?
Does anyone know who, aside from Gordon Brown, was the last university educated Prime Minister who did not go to Oxford?
I only ask because looking at the list of Labour Leader candidates only two (Cooper and Burnham) went to Oxford (the other three are Cambridge graduates).
Baldwin (Trinity, Cambridge)?
Churchill was at Cambridge.
Churchill is, of course, a college at Cambridge but the Prime Minister of that name was not educated there or indeed at any university.
So it looks like Baldwin eighty years ago was the last English graduate PM who didn't go to Oxford. Not much point in Labour choosing any of the Cambridge team if they want to win in 2020 then.
Does anyone know who, aside from Gordon Brown, was the last university educated Prime Minister who did not go to Oxford?
I only ask because looking at the list of Labour Leader candidates only two (Cooper and Burnham) went to Oxford (the other three are Cambridge graduates).
Your whisky is on its way, could be delivered anytime in the next couple of weeks. I haven't used the company before and they do not seem very speedy...
That is very good of you, Doc, I will raise the first glass to you. Thanks.
''Cameron's constant attacks of the Welsh NHS certainly bore fruit there.''The locals believed Cameron's attacks over their own experiences of the superb NHS of Wales? Wales is going tory because labour's tutelage has been a catastrophe, and not because of anything David Cameron said. UKIP is picking up the votes of those who are completely fed up of labour, but cannot bring themselves to vote tory.
Labour tory hating kippers are willing to share a party with tory defects like Hamilton? Willing to vote for a party led by a public school educated velvet collared commodities trader? Funny old world if that's true.
You are quite right and it doesn't make sense. There is little doubt that Labour has taken its core support in the Valleys for granted. In the past the protest vote went to Plaid but now it is going to UKIP, or should I say, Farage.Plaid should also be worried at the emergence of UKIP in the Valleys. As I said in an earlier post, I fear a bloodbath for Labour in 2016 Assembly elections.
''Cameron's constant attacks of the Welsh NHS certainly bore fruit there.''The locals believed Cameron's attacks over their own experiences of the superb NHS of Wales? Wales is going tory because labour's tutelage has been a catastrophe, and not because of anything David Cameron said. UKIP is picking up the votes of those who are completely fed up of labour, but cannot bring themselves to vote tory.
Labour tory hating kippers are willing to share a party with tory defects like Hamilton? Willing to vote for a party led by a public school educated velvet collared commodities trader? Funny old world if that's true.
'You are quite right and it doesn't make sense. There is little doubt that Labour has taken its core support in the Valleys for granted. In the past the protest vote went to Plaid but now it is going to UKIP, or should I say, Farage.Plaid should also be worried at the emergence of UKIP in the Valleys. As I said in an earlier post, I fear a bloodbath for Labour in 2016 Assembly elections.'
One of the unintended consequences of devolution has been to undermine Labour in Westminster elections simply because blame for failures in many policy areas such as health & education cannot simply be directed at a Tory Government in London. Paradoxically If Labour were to lose power in the Assembly in 2016 their prospects in Wales in 2020 might benefit quite a bit.Personally I would like to see another Referendum to ask the electorate whether it wishes to see the Assembly continue.
A neat summary of the 59 Scottish MPs backgrounds, not quite the marauding bunch of benefit junkies you were probably expecting. Apologies I don't think any of them have been to Oxbridge:
valleyboy Labour will win in Wales next year as it has done in every election since 1918 apart from the 2009 Euro elections. The Tories will remain the main opposition, but I would be surprised if they do as well as Plaid's 17 seats in 1999, they won 14 in 2011
snip One of the unintended consequences of devolution has been to undermine Labour in Westminster elections simply because blame for failures in many policy areas such as health & education cannot simply be directed at a Tory Government in London. Paradoxically If Labour were to lose power in the Assembly in 2016 their prospects in Wales in 2020 might benefit quite a bit.Personally I would like to see another Referendum to ask the electorate whether it wishes to see the Assembly continue.
I agree - they would be better with South Wales Powerhouse.
Does anyone know who, aside from Gordon Brown, was the last university educated Prime Minister who did not go to Oxford?
I only ask because looking at the list of Labour Leader candidates only two (Cooper and Burnham) went to Oxford (the other three are Cambridge graduates).
Baldwin (Trinity, Cambridge)?
Brown was of course also only the 2nd PM who went to university but not Oxbridge - the only other one being Henry John Temple, Viscount Palmerston (coincidentally, he also went to Edinburgh, but a fair while before Brown...).
I believe Neville Chamberlain attended Birmingham University.
Comments
A lot of people oop north who can't stand either Labour, UKIP or the Nats could vote Nat to get the buggers out.
Re-read Alan Clark recently - delicious.
Labour needs a leader that can fight the SNP effectively if it wants to get rid of the Tory-SNP card in the next election, but who can that be?
Then there is the baggage.
Burnham has the NHS disaster from when he was Health secretary around his neck.
Cooper has Ed Balls around her neck.
The rest are even worse.
Cooper would have had the upper hand in the fight though if only she wasn't married to Balls, the guilt by association is her problem.
Looking through for an alternative and safe pair of hands I see Graham Allen though I don't know if he wants the job much less if he can win the leadership.
Guardian readers (if CIF is anything to by) are unbelievable. Anyone who isn't a hardcore socialist a la Owen Jones is suddenly a 'neo-liberal'. Like with those who hang out the DM and Telegraph comments' section, there is no sense of middle ground; there is no sense that there are shades of grey in people's views, and that not everyone can even be pigeon-holed into 'left' or 'right'. These people are the personification of delusion; who have yet to realise the kind of agenda they pursue simply does not win elections. There is much room to critique New Labour; how, in many ways it let down many people when in government. But New Labour's hypothesis that you can only win elections in the centre-ground, and you need a good electoral machine to do so is fundamentally correct.
If Guardian readers want the Labour party to be some McClukeyite contortion, fine - but Labour will be completely powerless, carping at the sidelines in opposition without any genuine power to help many vulnerable people in our society. And these same people will be crying come election day.
What amazes me is the sheer intolerance of these people; that they actively want Liz Kendall not to be on the ballot, simply because they don't agree with her. They are the kind of people who will push Labour backwards, not forwards; who want to narrow the range of voices of those who can be a part of the Labour party. It is anything but egalitarian, or fair.
If LAB/SLAB have a similar relationship it opens up the possibility that a particularly impressive leader of Scottish Labour could be put forward as PM of the UK. If Labour were led by Burnham, and Scottish Labour were led by Gordon Brown, more than a few might prefer the original.
Why don't Labour and Unite just merge?
They could themselves LabourUnite. Or just....Unite.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=amZsdpLXcIo
Secondly, isn’t there usually a Dissolution Honours List, in which various defeated MP’s get sent to the Lords? When do we expect that and who do we expect to be on that list.
Or not, as the case may be.
Personally, I would be surprised if Vince Cable accepted a peerage. Simon Hughes might be a different matter.
From the SNP they could take "Scottish National".
And from the Labour Party they could take "Party".
(c) Spitting Image years ago.
Of course, those un-nominated candidates might be more electable to the country at large, but perhaps the party needs another brick to the head before it realises that...
Win/Win
As The_Apocalypse has articulated, there are people "who want to narrow the range of voices of those who can be a part of the Labour party" and a lot of these in the PLP would rather lose under Ed than win under David - inshallah.
Kennedy?
Why is everyone assuming the 2013 boundaries will be implemented, surely there will be a new review and new boundaries.
To be fair, I heard him on (I think) John Pienaar a couple of weeks ago and he was pretty eloquent about Labour's failings - especially on economics.
http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/may/18/labour-party-leadership-race-spadocracy-special-advisers
"The candidates for the Labour leadership are coming forward. And two things are clear. The first is that they are all former special advisers, or spads. The only exception to this is Mary Creagh. And she was the leader of the Labour group on Islington council (which some people might say is the next best thing). What’s also remarkable is that they all come from one wing of the Labour party. Not a single one of the current candidates opposed the Iraq war, not a single one supports taking back the railways into public ownership, not a single one opposes “austerity-lite” and not a single one opposes the welfare cap."
To me there is a distinct moral difference between a right-winger who dislikes the EU and is squeamish about immigration and a left-winger who thinks the systematic slaughter of thousands of political opponents was acceptable as long as it pissed America off.
Yep, it's really quite sad.
Are there any other married couples in the Lords?
1997 - 53.8%
2001 - 47.3%
2005 - 42.5%
2010 - 38.4%
2015 - 37.0%
Down by a third. CCHQ clocked this - it sent the BattleBus down there for a day. It is quite possible that the 1,500 or so extra voter "conversations" this would have generated could have found enough "maybe's" to tip it over into the Blue column with a majority of 27.
The Canadian election in October looks set to be exciting. Latest polls: Con 31.8%, Lib 30.0%, NDP 24.0%, Green 7.5%, BQ 4.3%:
http://www.threehundredeight.com/
Mr. Antifrank, I wonder if male spouses of peers will end up getting a sort-of title, the way the wife of a knight or lord is Lady Marriedwell. Not sure how it works with gay couples either. Hmm.
The former MP Martin Caton was standing down, the Conservative candidate Byron Davies was well-known (he is an AM for that region) and the constituency has long been trending Tory.
The Vale of Clwyd was more of a surprise, as Chris Ruane was perceived as a good constituency MP (though I think he did recently run into expenses trouble & that may have been what did him in).
Presumably the Welsh constituencies will be completely different next time. There is probably no way of extending Gower constituency into Llanelli or Swansea West & maintaining a Tory majority.
'Was it only two weeks ago she had all but given up?..'
No at least two years ago, all those red Lib Dems switching en masse to our Nick , confirmed by his numerous canvass returns and the fact that everyone had made their minds up and nothing was going to change them.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Purge#Number_of_people_executed
[nested quotes edited out]
' Not a single one of the current candidates opposed the Iraq war, not a single one supports taking back the railways into public ownership, not a single one opposes “austerity-lite” and not a single one opposes the welfare cap."
Can't understand why Diane Abbott doesn't go for it and then she can personally see how popular that stuff is with her colleagues.
http://www.cpgb-ml.org/index.php?secName=leaflets&subName=display&leafletId=89
If Rick from the Young Ones set up a site, it would look like this. They're all so agonisingly earnest.
http://www.thestepfordstudent.co.uk/dear-tory-voter-i-can-call-you-a-cunt-if-i-want/
I was arguing with some lefties on Facebook the other day (they'd posted a link to Polly T, of all people) about being able to see past your prejudices. There is a suspicion on the left that Tories are ideologues who only care about the rich, and there is a suspicion on the right that the Unions bosses would wreak serious damage on British business if they got their hands on the tiller.
In my opinion people like McCluskey* should be more feared than, say, a John Redwood. And I suspect that many more centrists fear the Union bosses more than they do the Tory right wingers (and rightly so).
This was borne out by the election result.
*Some of the people around McCluskey and the late Bob Crow are/were nasty pieces of work. Far more ideological than any right wing Tories are.
'Now who thought it was a good idea for Labour to make an election about the NHS ... in Wales?'
Just a shame they didn't give education the same prominence.
“The Labour Party, if we pulled out, would be bankrupt,” he told BBC radio. “If you took away the support of affiliated unions financially then it would be difficult to see how the Labour Party would fight a general election.”
His comment was seen as a rebuff to MPs who have hit out at the influence of Mr McCluskey, who helped to force the resignation of defeated Scottish Labour leader Jim Murphy.
Mr Kenny said: “If we are going to have bloodletting, it’s better to do it now rather than in two years.”
I don't see why we shouldn't look forward to bloodletting now as well as in two years' time.
http://www.hl.co.uk/news/2015/5/18/labour-will-go-bankrupt-if-it-loses-union-cash
[Incidentally the new Hargreaves-Lansdown news services is free and rather good. It sometimes includes FT and other paywall articles for free].
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_polling_for_the_42nd_Canadian_federal_election
Wales was a massive disappointment for us Labourites, but previous elections that we follow in England with the trend. All credit to our opponents who clearly fought a cleverer campaign.
Gower is the posh part of Swansea and it perhaps not too much of a surprise, on reflection, that the Tories sneaked in. Vale of Clwyd was perhaps a little different in so much as the hospital was a big issue there and the Tory winner is a GP. Cameron's constant attacks of the Welsh NHS certainly bore fruit there.
I worry about next years Assembly elections I can see Labour getting a hiding from all sides, including UKIP who are establishing a presence in the Valleys.
That should be rock solid Labour but the Tories are only 1800 votes behind now. 2020 could see Chester go Labour and Wrexham go Tory, that'd be quite something.
Or is it going to be chickens coming home to roost?
The locals believed Cameron's attacks over their own experiences of the superb NHS of Wales?
Wales is going tory because labour's tutelage has been a catastrophe, and not because of anything David Cameron said.
UKIP is picking up the votes of those who are completely fed up of labour, but cannot bring themselves to vote tory.
I only ask because looking at the list of Labour Leader candidates only two (Cooper and Burnham) went to Oxford (the other three are Cambridge graduates).
There's a direct causal line from the gerrymandering of the '79 devo ref to the 56 SNP MPs trying to nick Skinner's bench spot now.
So it looks like Baldwin eighty years ago was the last English graduate PM who didn't go to Oxford. Not much point in Labour choosing any of the Cambridge team if they want to win in 2020 then.
http://www.newrepublic.com/article/120208/disliking-jamie-oliver-nothing-snobbery
As I said in an earlier post, I fear a bloodbath for Labour in 2016 Assembly elections.
https://twitter.com/RobbieDinwoodie/status/600266504744148992/photo/1