Categories
Options
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Burnham’s nomination surge could block out other LAB leader
politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » Burnham’s nomination surge could block out other LAB leadership contenders
We all remember how the big unions were able to influence the 2010 leadership race by sending out to political levy paying members ballot packs like the one above. This time the rules have changed and the opportunity to influence is most strong at the nomination stage.
0
This discussion has been closed.
Comments
Given its an AV vote there's really little need to restrict the field from an operational PoV. The bar could be lowered to two people needed for nominations.
This has long been a cyclical pattern of behaviour within Farage's fiefdom at the top of Ukip, only difference this time, is that increased electoral success has brought far more media scrutiny. Patrick O'Flynn and Suzanne Evans are not just the latest political casualties to fall on their swords because they stood up to Farage, they also happen to be two of the strongest and most effective media performers Ukip has produced outside of Farage in recent years... Douglas Carswell and Mark Reckless really burnt their political boats when they defected from the Conservative party to Ukip, so its interesting that Carswell won his battle on the issue of the Ukip short money while Reckless is now being offered a key role in the party after losing his seat.
Farage has long relied on a Ukip membership group think that has him as the one man star and key component to their growing success in the polls over recent years. But in fact he has long been the barrier to that widening appeal over the last decade. Just check out the amount of Ukip MEP's who have fallen by the wayside in recent years, or Farage's falling personal polling in the run up to the 2015 GE. Farage's last appearance on BBC QuestionTime as he defended his decision to withdraw his pledge to resign as Ukip Leader if he failed to be elected as an MP was a disaster as it laid bared his personal failings as a leader.
Ukip benefited far more from the former 'respectable' protest party of the Libdems entering into a Coalition Government with the Conservatives than they have ever done with Farage as their leader. Genuinely believe that Ukip membership are making a huge mistake by backing yesterday's man instead of Ukip's future potential leaders.
Andy Burnham wasn't the answer to the Labour Leadership contest five years ago when they decided to vote for Ed Miliband and go on the NHS rather than the economy big time. Picking Andy Burnham while trying to now rescue the Labour party credibility on either economy or the NHS seems rather far fetched and complacent.
I'd have thought the dynamics of this would be good for Liz Kendall in that:
1) MPs aren't going to send members a no-woman shortlist, so she's likely to get her 35.
2) If it's her vs Burnham that feels very "future vs the past", whereas if there's a wider field it's more "front-runner vs crowd of non-entities".
It's their party, and they'll buy who they want to, buy who they want to, buy who they want to....
Bizarre though it is to say it, the departure of David and Ed Miliband and Ed Balls from the front-line has robbed Labour of its figures of gravitas.
Miliband was the Union's choice
Burnham may be anointed unopposed as the Union's choice.
What could possibly go wrong?
http://www.cambridge-news.co.uk/scscscs/story-26531276-detail/story.html
Also some other things many liberal Christians are uncomfortable with, e.g. the genocides in the Books of Samuel.
Burnham's problem is he is not an unknown, but he's still a nonentity, which could also be said of Cooper. He's been around for a long time, including three years in the cabinet, and people still don't rate him. That leaves only Liz Kendall as the potential unknown springing a surprise (the David Cameron figure, if you like).
I thought the associated article:
Some of our Dinosaurs are Missing was about SLab:
http://www.cambridge-news.co.uk/dinosaurs-missing-Cambridge-playgroup-s-toys/story-26495278-detail/story.html
They need a third way, decoupled from the Unions.. but that's a long way off. It will take a few more election losses for the penny to sink in.
(I have no idea how that might pan out but what I do know is that the more the Unions interfere in the Labour party, the less electable it will become)
Repeating the same mistake is the sign of Ed Miliband,
Meanwhile, Cooper (HIPS) and Burnham (banks and Mid Staffs)...
A Scottish party’s toy-like dinosaurs have gone missing after the country was used as a venue for the general election.
The suspected theft of the MPs has left the few remaining Scottish Labour voters heartbroken after they went missing from all over the country on May 7.
A plea for their return has been put out on social media by the London-based party, started in 1900, that works with the dinosaurs, many of whom are "facing significant challenges in their lives".
The party tweeted: "Party's beloved MP’s went missing during #GE2015 when the country was democratically polled. Have you seen them?!"
His work on the NHS has been considerably less inspired. He scored a number of points when the hapless Lansley was in charge trying to get his shambles of a bill through the Commons but he has been hopelessly outclassed by Hunt and embarrassed by some of the disasters in the NHS that may not have happened on his watch but which he showed no interest whatsoever in getting to the bottom of.
His failures in that respect are painfully telling and make me question whether he is fit for leadership, let alone deserving of a coronation. He was more concerned with the image of the NHS than he was for those that had been abused and killed by its neglect (an interesting contrast to Hillsborough in some ways). Labour under him will still be a slave to the producer interest, more focussed on the staff than the customers. As of course are the Unions that are backing him so strongly.
This emphasis on the producer interest fits not only with the Unions but also the membership of the Labour party which is dominated by those that work in the public sector. Nothing wrong with that but if they want to win elections they need to be much more focussed on the 26m that don't work in the public sector than the 5m who do. I don't see them getting that from Burnham.
Coming fourth in a contest after a long spell in cabinet, or even being unable to run - that's being a nonentity.
I think I have uncovered the problem. You are defining non-entities as 'someone who is not known' (the classic post-Latin definition). I would argue that it means 'someone who is no good' (which is the current colloquial definition - 'that person's a complete nonentity').
That is a very different thing, and that's where we're getting into this tangle. If we go by your definition, you would be right about the 2005 contest although it would be worth pointing out in Clarke and Rifkind there were two big names involved.
On my definition, clearly Burnham and Cooper are nonentities - but on yours, they would not be, because they are not unknowns.
Interesting, the way language informs debate!
Anyway must get off to work. Have a good morning.
In Burnham's case though, his baggage makes that even more important - if he appears to be dodging the bullets at an early stage, it will only make it worse later when the said bullet is fired by David Cameron on live TV.
Didn't win the election, so let's have a strike to get our way instead. Bah!
It's also right in saying that the new Labour leader would have to show competence in leadership. Although that's hardly an unusual view. ;-)
If Labour elect Burnham as leader, it'll be like replacing Mr Bean with Baldrick.
In fact, it would actually be Mr Bean (Brown) with Wallace (Miliband) and then Baldrick (Burnham)
But for me the process is not as important as the result. I accept that the process, especially the envelope at the top of the page, haunted Ed Miliband but the current system should resolve that.
What Labour need is a leader with a vision that embraces a much bigger share of the electorate than Ed ever did; someone with interesting things to say and a willingness to embrace new ideas to old problems even if it means challenging vested interests, especially so perhaps.
He carried perhaps a fatal amount of baggage but for me Balls was by far the brightest and most interesting Labour politician of his generation, one of the few that survived the killing fields of talent that created Brown's coronation. His contributions will be missed. His wife is also clearly very bright but has problems expressing herself in an interesting or engaging way. Kendall seems to have no problem with the latter but for me she has yet to show that she has something of substance to say.
Without getting bogged down in the non entity debate Cameron undoubtedly used 5 years as LOTO to get himself known and to win a following in the country. It is a gamble, especially in a party which finds it impossible to get rid of duffers IDS style, but I think Labour should do the same and go for a new face who is personable and capable of reaching out beyond the core vote.
If the Unions prevent that from being even a choice open to the electorate they will have done the Labour party another grave disservice.
My bigger concern is that I see diminishing signs of Labour engaging in any serious analysis of their purpose. Without that any leader who emerges is unlikely to shine.
It is really vital that Labour spends 6 months plus under Harriet in debating its future and its raison d'etre. This time would allow the leadership candidates to either come to the fore or diminish and reveal their lack of abilities and capabilities.
This long debate and soul-searching is against the strategy of the unions who want a quick coronation so that they can still control their puppet's strings. As the unions' thinking is still of that of a century ago, any form of long debate would diminish their effect on the leadership outcome and their future power-base.
He fell into Lynton Crosby's elephant sized trap and for that we should be forever grateful as it helped the Tories win a majority.
Cooper's on as well, yes?
I do wonder if they'll go for Burnham. Surely Labour will tire of rubbish leaders sooner or later?
FPT: I think you're too harsh on Farage. He was criticised for unresigning, so has taken that on board and selflessly resigned several other people.
A fact that means I will struggle to support him next time.
If Kendall becomes leader i am more likely to vote Green than Lab in 2020.
Lab is in a mess for every centre right vote it woos it will lose core vote to NOTA, Green or a Farron led LD party (the latter won't apply if Lamb wins).
Alternatively we have seen at GE2015 how successful a core vote strategy under FPTP is!!
http://reddwarf.wikia.com/wiki/Ace_Rimmer
Or rather, it shows how good the Brown clique was at sowing the fields with salt.
You're right, if Kendall is selected a Farron Lib Dem party could do well. But Labour need to try and pick up the centre ground.
Which seems apt, as I said Ed Miliband = Hannibal
Second and third on my most disliked Labour politicians behind the war criminal
Why would you hate the only people that got you elected in the last 40 years?
Milburn introduced wasteful competition to the NHS and is a Tory
Mandleson is a slimy Tory
As for Blair he is a Christian, Tory, War Criminal.
Whats not to like!!
That should stop 35 votes dead in its tracks....
Remarkable how the only guy to win Labour an election in 40 years is so toxic within his own.party. The contrast with that other election-winning beast of our times - Maggie in the Tory party - is striking
However, if Burnham wins how he wins is utterly vital. If it's perceived as a stitch up for a member of the old guard then all the stuff we can predict will be thrown at him will stick, and it will be deserved especially if he repeats the same mantras he did under Miliband (we don't know how much of the emphasis was his). Despite being around on Black Wednesday and being a party man from the days when the Tories were as popular as Raheem Sterling in Kirkdale, Cameron managed to convince the wider public that he was his own man by taking on his party's more prehistoric elements. Burnham arguably faces a tougher task, but must do the same and challenge the conventional view of him as a candidate of party continuity. However unfair it might be, if he doesn't it'll stick. If he does he could be a strong Lab leader - hinterland, not an empty suit and maybe one of the few who can speak to the three parts of the electorate who currently hold Labour in a vice (Scots, mid England, Northern working class voters). If he wins with an uninspiring campaign where he plays it safe and is an inevitability, none of that applies.
Fed up with the weather or just bored? Test your emoji skills - said to be difficult for the over -40s.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-3087513/What-emoji-IQ-test-reveal-know-symbols-mean.html
She thinks Lab spent too much on public services that were on their knees after 18 yrs of right of centre wrecking.
Even Blair didnt think twice about that.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/matt/
Unions are not uniform blocks and do not always have a left wing agenda, indeed the reasons that unions became so strong in the middle part of the last century was not that there was a mass radicalisation of the working class, it was that the workers wanted better pay and conditions. The popularity of unions was more to do with materialistic aspiration than socialist ideology, though socialist ideologues often hijacked them.
If there is a big endorsement today then it would most likely be from some of the 2010 or 2015 intake. Possibly Chuka or Stella.
Miss Heel, a brand consultant and mother-of two, also joked "can't we have a military coup to get rid of our democratically elected government".
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/andy-burnham/11616686/Andy-Burnhams-wife-Marie-France-attacks-his-rivals-on-Twitter.html
The Stafford case is big on PB but hardly impinges on the wider public, and as you say his role was more cover-up which is the instinctive reaction of authority.
He ticks the Northern box thus helping to repel some of the Ukip threat and the continuity will help with the London elite. His downside is his earnest dullness, but that applies to Yvette too.
Neither will be as disastrous as Ed.
But inspiring? No.
http://newstonoone.blogspot.co.uk/2015/05/2020-where-next-for-snp-britains-third.html
On the point wrt to spending. Clearly Labour spent too much. But I would argue not on public services. Most of the money was spent mopping after market failures. Some of which could have been avoided.
Regardless, writing her off before the contest has even started is daft.
Tim Farron led party to be more acceptable than a Kendall led LAB methinks,
Although the one bright spot would be that if she does we know Hunt wouldnt!!
Mind you, it would seem to be academic, with Burnham or Cooper the likelier victor.
"but all of a sudden a huge chunk of that tax just disappeared."
Exactly. Even I as a non-economist, understand that.
"Those were the days, my friend,
We thought they'd never end,
We'd sing and dance forever and a day."
Hubris writ large gets its come-uppance.
"On election day, one friend cried to me: “I can’t believe I’m a Tory – I hate myself.”
The mind boggles....
I'd love to see Balls samba and his Argentinian Foxtrot.
My Eurovision tips for this year.
Spain and Le Royaume-Uni, available at around 246 and 341 on Betfair.
Both of these can produce economic growth, in that if people have money then they spend it on consumer goods, but neither is real investment in the economy or social infrastructure. The purpose of the significant payrise for doctors was to push through the marketisation of the NHS by stuffing our mouths with gold.
There are many self-righteous famous people and opinion-formers who claim the moral high ground exclusively for the left, as if the those who support the Conservatives are monsters or having 'wrong' opinions/doing democracy wrong.
They personally agree with the blues but all the 'cool kids' are saying it's wrong.
We saw such nonsense barely days after the vote, with protests against the elected government less than a week after polling day.