It looks like a Starmer v Long Bailey race, Starmer as the Portillo style 'moderniser' candidate, Long-Bailey as the IDS style 'traditionalist' candidate after a heavy defeat to the re elected governing party
Starmer is the dictionary definition of a fuck up though, over the way his Remainer outlook took Labour to a Brexit No-man's Land - and left them there.
Long Bailey is the dictionary definition of a fuck up waiting to happen - history repeating itself as farce.
Any selection that does not put Nandy in the mix is the dictionary definition of self harm.
But hey, this is the twenty first century Labour Party.
I am not so sure. If last week told us anything it is that Labour have a bigger toxicity issue than the Tories. Racism being a big one.
ge!
I think you've got this the wrong way round. The lesson of this election was that the Tories are becoming less toxic in that people who previously have said they wouldn't ever vote Tory are now doing so, particularly among working class voters. This is something that Labour should frankly have known was going to happen at some point - the trend was in the long-term data (as the FT thread showed) and Fatcha, even Major, are fading memories for many.
It also showed that plenty of people were not prepared to vote for Labour if they didn't like the party very much (i.e. you need to earn their votes and can't assume they'll be automatically in the bag). This is neither new nor a Labour-specific issue. Yes it will have harmed the Labour brand. But I don't think it's the same as the party being long-term toxic in the same way that "The Nasty Party" (copyright T May) got, because it seems that many traditional Lab voters who went elsewhere in 2019 still identify with the party to some extent and will be willing to vote for it again, particularly if "trying to undo my Brexit vote" and "leadership in cahoots with terrorists, won't sign the national anthem" type doubts can be removed.
Toxicity is really about ceilings not floors, and Labour's performance at this election tells us more about their floor than their ceiling. (We also got to see some impression of the Tory ceiling under a "reaches the parts other leaders can't" kind of PM, so we have learned a little about Tory toxicity.) All the "brand strength" and "could you ever consider voting ... " polling, even during the Corbyn era, suggested Labour had a decent upside if they could only just exploit it, and were at an advantage relative to the Conservatives on this front. A new leader ought to be better-placed to reach out, if they were able to overcome the party's internal mechanics, which remain inward-looking.
Good analysis.
Except for the brand toxicity point, which reveals a certain partiality of outlook. Labour’s brand carries as much toxicity as the Tories’, that is equally enduring. In the case of older voters it derives from events decades ago.
Where you have a point is that in the right, very favourable circumstances, new voters can be won over. The most remarkable thing about this election are the interviews with ‘always Labour’ northern folk expressing amazement and surprise about their own voting Tory. It’s taken them thirty years to overcome the memories of the 1980s. So political recollections aren’t wiped clean in a hurry.
I may live to regret it but his odds at present seem to exhibit the classic Betfair centrist bias for metro candidates that its punters continually fall for.
I've shorted him too an am now getting the fear. Why has he come in further since last night?
Nick. You were very close with your GE Tory majority prediction of 60 seats, despite it being very far from what you would have wanted to happen.
Care to share your thoughts on the current value bets in the Labour leadership election?
RLB obviously has appeal to the "let me just find the most left-wing candidate" vote, which is maybe 35% of the membership. I'd sell Nandy - the Remain membership is resigned to leaving but I doubt if they actually want to embrace a Leaver as leader, and will not elect someone who was openly anti-Corbyn (Jess Phillips? Even more no.).
Starmer's interview in the Guardian today is pitch-perfect - as Wilson said, the party is best run from the centre-left, and we appreciate loyally doing your best even when out of favour. People feel it'd be nice to have a woman leader, other things being equal, but it's not decisive - we wouldn't elect Kate Hoey in a zillion years. His (female) PPS's point that "nobody asked me on the doorstep to find a leader with ovaries" is relevant.
But his snag - apart from his distinctly non-leftie air - is more that he's definitely an insider in Westminster - despite his interesting background, nobody in Wigan will feel he's going to understand them instinctively. If he can overcome that, I think he'll win; as the popular Rayner apparently isn't standing. Otherwise, RLB is probably the most likely.
Just been catching up on YouGov's latest favourability ratings - Corbyn completely in the basement, though poor Jo Swinson gets a terrible kicking as well - but also this stood out:
Nicola Sturgeon - net favourability... With 2017 Con voters: -77 With 2016 Leave voters: -70
Leaving aside the question of whether or not Johnson's intransigence over Indyref2 can survive another Nat or Nat/Green majority at Holyrood come 2021, one gathers the impression that his new voter coalition will not exactly be distraught at his refusal to play ball with the First Minister.
Whether this also indicates that the Tory base is truly committed to the Union, or if it's more the case that they don't care and are simply disinclined to listen to Scottish special pleading, who can say? More research required.
A Westminster Bubble way of looking at the world if ever I saw one.
Rather than looking at what 2017 Con voters and 2016 Leave voters think (or, more accurately, feel), ask yourself occasionally what Scots think (or, more accurately, feel).
The key to saving the Union lies in Scotland, not in England. But feel free to keep searching in the wrong place.
And - and I appreciate it’s not in your political interests to share that information - what is that key?
I think that one of things needed to be addressed by Boris & Co is a '24k mile service' on devolution - another of the Blair projects that has gone off half-cocked.
Quite how one engages the wibbling hatemongers of Sturgeon's Nutty Party is another question. Perhaps the problem is with the people in the leadership.
Once the Tories highlight their decades long record of backtracking, empty promises and downright opposition to Scottish devolution, I'm sure the wibbling hatemongers of Sturgeon's Nutty Party will be entirely amenable to engagement.
I may live to regret it but his odds at present seem to exhibit the classic Betfair centrist bias for metro candidates that its punters continually fall for.
I think with Starmer he’s been elevated to some kind of mythical status by centrists as the Labour saviour, but has spent the election away from the camera so they might find under scrutiny he falls very short of the hype.
Starmer is too London, too left and too second referendum for the majority of the country but on the upside he can string a sentence together and be on top of his brief. He’s clearly and wisely attempting to pull in support from the Corbynista wing in his Guardian editorial but it remains to be seen how big an issue gender is in this race.
I agree on Starmer, and being very red on him have every incentive to do so. Of the boxes to be ticked, he ticks none of them, except for the very large one marked ‘new messiah wanted’. And he only gets near that box on account of his moderateness and superficial appearance.
The expectation must be that Labour members will find it impossible to swallow all their medicine in one go and will start with RLB as the first of sequence of leaders from the left. Or there’s a small chance they will feel brave enough to gamble on someone from the centre like Nandy.
"Quick, I need a city beginning with A!!!" "Aberdeen?" "Too Scottish" "Abergavenny?" "Too Welsh" "Andover?" "God have you been there? No" "OK, how about Abbotsford?" "Brilliant! Scottish but sounds English! I'll take it!" "Good"
Pause
"Now get off my doorstep and go home Francesca, you psycho"
In Scottish terms Abbotsford isn't even a place as such, just the made up name of a country house. Perhaps Franny has lots of pals among the tour guides.
Not only that, but Labour won in Birmingham and Chester. Neither are particularly good examples of Leavey places drifting away from Labour. She'd have been better going for Bolsover and Crewe.
Could have gone all green a little while back when Jess' odds tumbled. Kicking myself about that. Hoping Thornberry announces she'll run and her odds come in significantly.
Now I'm: RLB +20 Nandy +14 Starmer -210 Philips +400 Thornberry +600 The rest-150 (excluding some longshots who I can't lay) Miliband -450
Fascinating belatedly catching up with Laura K's The Brexit Storm - how many MPs voting down May's deal thought they were stopping Brexit.....She also makes the point that up to now, Parliament and voters had been aligned on implementing the results of referendums - this time Parliament and the voters were at odds - the voters had given Parliament an instruction it didn't like. The rest, they say, is history...
They all thought they were so clever. Outplayed and boxed in an impotent pm, forced him to do the thing he didn’t want to do. Use every aspect of Parliament to stop at every turn.
In hindsight it was all over when Boris got a new deal. I wonder at what point between agreement for a new deal and the announcement of the exit poll those people trying to stop Brexit worked out they’ve messed it all up.
Along the lines of "There is a lot to criticise. But Pol Pot transformed Cambodian politics"......
My favourite comment below: "The main problem is that all your ideas were designed to govern a society far more deserving than one you needed to be elected by."
This election was the worst she has been though. Door step reaction utterly dire.
We are back to Corbyn being poison.
I think Nandy might be the best shout for a Kinnock-vs-Militant style clear out that gives Labour a shot not at 2024, but at 2029. Rayner not trusted by the left, RLB and Burgon too lefty and bovine, Starmer too metropolitan and won't carry the membership. But I don't think Labour will go for that.
The Con voter in me says to want an unelectable Corbynista like Burgon, but I just can't put the Jewish people I know through another election like that.
Stop it with your Burgon. Even I would vote for Johnson, if that huge pudding became Labour Leader.
Do you know that in civilised countries they get to have a choice that isn't just the lesser of two massive shits?
Worth noting BoZo's pisspoor rating. Not quite as bad as Jezza, but not too far off. I cannot see any reason for it to improve.
Er - doing as he has promised?
Check out his ratings in, say, February 2020.....
And then contrast with his ratings in February 2021!
Absolutely, I fully expect them to be improved once Boris gets his trade deal and the sky doesn't collapse and Remainers are left wondering what they were so afraid about and Brexit is fine afterall.
Labour have been very critical of many organisations over female representation at the very top (e.g FTSE companies).
The Metropolitan Police, Oxford and Cambridge University, MI5, the Tories & all other political parties, Scotland, the European Commission have all had women at the very top.
Even the DUP. Even UKIP. The NZ Labour Party. The Australian Labor Party.
Are Labour really going to be able to have a competition for the top job between 3 or 4 women and 1 man .... and choose the man?
If any other organisation did this, Labour would be lecturing them on unconscious bias and discrimination.
IMO, Starmer is better off doing a Raynor, and pushing for deputy position behind Nandy.
Both the two front runners look too short to me at present. One of them might well win but recent experience has shown that outsiders can come up very fast, and neither is exactly flawless.
Along the lines of "There is a lot to criticise. But Pol Pot transformed Cambodian politics"......
My favourite comment below: "The main problem is that all your ideas were designed to govern a society far more deserving than one you needed to be elected by."
Just....wow.
After the uprising of the 17th of June The Secretary of the Writers' Union Had leaflets distributed on the Stalinallee Stating that the people Had forfeited the confidence of the government And could only win it back By increased work quotas. Would it not in that case be simpler for the government To dissolve the people And elect another?
I may live to regret it but his odds at present seem to exhibit the classic Betfair centrist bias for metro candidates that its punters continually fall for.
I think with Starmer he’s been elevated to some kind of mythical status by centrists as the Labour saviour, but has spent the election away from the camera so they might find under scrutiny he falls very short of the hype.
Starmer is too London, too left and too second referendum for the majority of the country but on the upside he can string a sentence together and be on top of his brief. He’s clearly and wisely attempting to pull in support from the Corbynista wing in his Guardian editorial but it remains to be seen how big an issue gender is in this race.
I think the gender thing is a bit of a myth.
Despite what’s said in public - where there’s really only one answer to be given - it’ll be the politics that determines which candidate is successful, not what they have between their legs.
I may live to regret it but his odds at present seem to exhibit the classic Betfair centrist bias for metro candidates that its punters continually fall for.
I've shorted him too an am now getting the fear. Why has he come in further since last night?
Punters piling onto the favourite and not wanting to be left out.
It’s far too early to be chasing the market, so I’m not.
Both the two front runners look too short to me at present. One of them might well win but recent experience has shown that outsiders can come up very fast, and neither is exactly flawless.
A simple question which should perhaps be asked is what qualifies ANYONE on the current Labour front bench to be considered a front runner for the leadership? Given that most, if not all, only owe their positions due to a willingness to serve under Corbyn. Now there may or may not be a huge amount of talent or ability elsewhere, but I’ll bet there’s a damned sight more than among the present shower.
Now it doesn’t always happen, but throughout history party front benches are generally populated by the better of their MPs, with politicians who are the best of their parties at or close to the peak of their abilities. The shadow Home Secretary is Diane Abbott.
Fascinating belatedly catching up with Laura K's The Brexit Storm - how many MPs voting down May's deal thought they were stopping Brexit.....She also makes the point that up to now, Parliament and voters had been aligned on implementing the results of referendums - this time Parliament and the voters were at odds - the voters had given Parliament an instruction it didn't like. The rest, they say, is history...
They all thought they were so clever. Outplayed and boxed in an impotent pm, forced him to do the thing he didn’t want to do. Use every aspect of Parliament to stop at every turn.
In hindsight it was all over when Boris got a new deal. I wonder at what point between agreement for a new deal and the announcement of the exit poll those people trying to stop Brexit worked out they’ve messed it all up.
It undermined the biggest fear of giving Boris a mandate. Whilst there is still a very real and I believe worrying possibility of crashing out with no agreement at the end of 2020 that is some way off and the immediate threat of no deal was removed. Boris may no deal in a year is a lot less impactful than he will no deal in a month.
Fascinating belatedly catching up with Laura K's The Brexit Storm - how many MPs voting down May's deal thought they were stopping Brexit.....She also makes the point that up to now, Parliament and voters had been aligned on implementing the results of referendums - this time Parliament and the voters were at odds - the voters had given Parliament an instruction it didn't like. The rest, they say, is history...
They all thought they were so clever. Outplayed and boxed in an impotent pm, forced him to do the thing he didn’t want to do. Use every aspect of Parliament to stop at every turn.
In hindsight it was all over when Boris got a new deal. I wonder at what point between agreement for a new deal and the announcement of the exit poll those people trying to stop Brexit worked out they’ve messed it all up.
Remain politicians having lost the referendum still thought they were right and acted like gamblers in a hole thinking they could bet bigger to win. Time and again they increased the stakes thinking that they'd win the next round and thus get out of the hole. Rather than taking a small loss (May's very soft Brexit deal) they wanted to win altogether so kept going 'double or quits'.
Now they've lost everything. They've gone from a soft deal negotiated by a Remain PM with trade negotiations going through a Remain Parliament to a much harder deal negotiated by a Vote Leave PM with trade negotiations going through a thumping majority for Leave Parliament.
Just been catching up on YouGov's latest favourability ratings - Corbyn completely in the basement, though poor Jo Swinson gets a terrible kicking as well - but also this stood out:
Nicola Sturgeon - net favourability... With 2017 Con voters: -77 With 2016 Leave voters: -70
Leaving aside the question of whether or not Johnson's intransigence over Indyref2 can survive another Nat or Nat/Green majority at Holyrood come 2021, one gathers the impression that his new voter coalition will not exactly be distraught at his refusal to play ball with the First Minister.
Whether this also indicates that the Tory base is truly committed to the Union, or if it's more the case that they don't care and are simply disinclined to listen to Scottish special pleading, who can say? More research required.
A Westminster Bubble way of looking at the world if ever I saw one.
Rather than looking at what 2017 Con voters and 2016 Leave voters think (or, more accurately, feel), ask yourself occasionally what Scots think (or, more accurately, feel).
The key to saving the Union lies in Scotland, not in England. But feel free to keep searching in the wrong place.
And - and I appreciate it’s not in your political interests to share that information - what is that key?
I think that one of things needed to be addressed by Boris & Co is a '24k mile service' on devolution - another of the Blair projects that has gone off half-cocked.
Quite how one engages the wibbling hatemongers of Sturgeon's Nutty Party is another question. Perhaps the problem is with the people in the leadership.
Once the Tories highlight their decades long record of backtracking, empty promises and downright opposition to Scottish devolution, I'm sure the wibbling hatemongers of Sturgeon's Nutty Party will be entirely amenable to engagement.
I may live to regret it but his odds at present seem to exhibit the classic Betfair centrist bias for metro candidates that its punters continually fall for.
I think with Starmer he’s been elevated to some kind of mythical status by centrists as the Labour saviour, but has spent the election away from the camera so they might find under scrutiny he falls very short of the hype.
Starmer is too London, too left and too second referendum for the majority of the country but on the upside he can string a sentence together and be on top of his brief. He’s clearly and wisely attempting to pull in support from the Corbynista wing in his Guardian editorial but it remains to be seen how big an issue gender is in this race.
I think the gender thing is a bit of a myth.
Despite what’s said in public - where there’s really only one answer to be given - it’ll be the politics that determines which candidate is successful, not what they have between their legs.
The Lib Dems should have demonstrated that. They chose the wrong candidate because of her lacking a Y chromosome and as a result they lost seats. There's no way the Lib Dems, who made the decision to have the election in the first place, should have lost seats and under Davey I doubt they would have.
The best leader not the best genitals is what should be getting looked for. From whomever that may be and if that is a woman then great but if its not that's fine too.
I may live to regret it but his odds at present seem to exhibit the classic Betfair centrist bias for metro candidates that its punters continually fall for.
I've shorted him too an am now getting the fear. Why has he come in further since last night?
Punters piling onto the favourite and not wanting to be left out.
It’s far too early to be chasing the market, so I’m not.
I may live to regret it but his odds at present seem to exhibit the classic Betfair centrist bias for metro candidates that its punters continually fall for.
I think with Starmer he’s been elevated to some kind of mythical status by centrists as the Labour saviour, but has spent the election away from the camera so they might find under scrutiny he falls very short of the hype.
Starmer is too London, too left and too second referendum for the majority of the country but on the upside he can string a sentence together and be on top of his brief. He’s clearly and wisely attempting to pull in support from the Corbynista wing in his Guardian editorial but it remains to be seen how big an issue gender is in this race.
I agree on Starmer, and being very red on him have every incentive to do so. Of the boxes to be ticked, he ticks none of them, except for the very large one marked ‘new messiah wanted’. And he only gets near that box on account of his moderateness and superficial appearance.
The expectation must be that Labour members will find it impossible to swallow all their medicine in one go and will start with RLB as the first of sequence of leaders from the left. Or there’s a small chance they will feel brave enough to gamble on someone from the centre like Nandy.
Ed Miliband and Corbyn have already been leaders from the left, RLB strikes me more as Ed Miliband than real radical though
Along the lines of "There is a lot to criticise. But Pol Pot transformed Cambodian politics"......
My favourite comment below: "The main problem is that all your ideas were designed to govern a society far more deserving than one you needed to be elected by."
Just....wow.
After the uprising of the 17th of June The Secretary of the Writers' Union Had leaflets distributed on the Stalinallee Stating that the people Had forfeited the confidence of the government And could only win it back By increased work quotas. Would it not in that case be simpler for the government To dissolve the people And elect another?
Great to see you quoting committed life long Marxists!
This election was the worst she has been though. Door step reaction utterly dire.
We are back to Corbyn being poison.
I think Nandy might be the best shout for a Kinnock-vs-Militant style clear out that gives Labour a shot not at 2024, but at 2029. Rayner not trusted by the left, RLB and Burgon too lefty and bovine, Starmer too metropolitan and won't carry the membership. But I don't think Labour will go for that.
The Con voter in me says to want an unelectable Corbynista like Burgon, but I just can't put the Jewish people I know through another election like that.
Stop it with your Burgon. Even I would vote for Johnson, if that huge pudding became Labour Leader.
Do you know that in civilised countries they get to have a choice that isn't just the lesser of two massive shits?
Worth noting BoZo's pisspoor rating. Not quite as bad as Jezza, but not too far off. I cannot see any reason for it to improve.
Er - doing as he has promised?
Check out his ratings in, say, February 2020.....
And then contrast with his ratings in February 2021!
Absolutely, I fully expect them to be improved once Boris gets his trade deal and the sky doesn't collapse and Remainers are left wondering what they were so afraid about and Brexit is fine afterall.
I would be extremely surprised if Boris's ratings are higher in February 2021 than in February 2020. The sky won't have collapsed, but many people are going to be very unhappy whatever Boris does (BINO or WTO) with regard to Brexit. And presumably he'll have passed various other unpopular measures, as PMs normally do at the start of their term.
Just been catching up on YouGov's latest favourability ratings - Corbyn completely in the basement, though poor Jo Swinson gets a terrible kicking as well - but also this stood out:
Nicola Sturgeon - net favourability... With 2017 Con voters: -77 With 2016 Leave voters: -70
Leaving aside the question of whether or not Johnson's intransigence over Indyref2 can survive another Nat or Nat/Green majority at Holyrood come 2021, one gathers the impression that his new voter coalition will not exactly be distraught at his refusal to play ball with the First Minister.
Whether this also indicates that the Tory base is truly committed to the Union, or if it's more the case that they don't care and are simply disinclined to listen to Scottish special pleading, who can say? More research required.
A Westminster Bubble way of looking at the world if ever I saw one.
Rather than looking at what 2017 Con voters and 2016 Leave voters think (or, more accurately, feel), ask yourself occasionally what Scots think (or, more accurately, feel).
The key to saving the Union lies in Scotland, not in England. But feel free to keep searching in the wrong place.
And - and I appreciate it’s not in your political interests to share that information - what is that key?
I think that one of things needed to be addressed by Boris & Co is a '24k mile service' on devolution - another of the Blair projects that has gone off half-cocked.
Quite how one engages the wibbling hatemongers of Sturgeon's Nutty Party is another question. Perhaps the problem is with the people in the leadership.
Once the Tories highlight their decades long record of backtracking, empty promises and downright opposition to Scottish devolution, I'm sure the wibbling hatemongers of Sturgeon's Nutty Party will be entirely amenable to engagement.
Have the Tories dissolved or suspended Holyrood yet, no
Just been catching up on YouGov's latest favourability ratings - Corbyn completely in the basement, though poor Jo Swinson gets a terrible kicking as well - but also this stood out:
Nicola Sturgeon - net favourability... With 2017 Con voters: -77 With 2016 Leave voters: -70
Leaving aside the question of whether or not Johnson's intransigence over Indyref2 can survive another Nat or Nat/Green majority at Holyrood come 2021, one gathers the impression that his new voter coalition will not exactly be distraught at his refusal to play ball with the First Minister.
Whether this also indicates that the Tory base is truly committed to the Union, or if it's more the case that they don't care and are simply disinclined to listen to Scottish special pleading, who can say? More research required.
A Westminster Bubble way of looking at the world if ever I saw one.
Rather than looking at what 2017 Con voters and 2016 Leave voters think (or, more accurately, feel), ask yourself occasionally what Scots think (or, more accurately, feel).
The key to saving the Union lies in Scotland, not in England. But feel free to keep searching in the wrong place.
54% of Scots voted for Unionist parties last Thursday
I may live to regret it but his odds at present seem to exhibit the classic Betfair centrist bias for metro candidates that its punters continually fall for.
I think with Starmer he’s been elevated to some kind of mythical status by centrists as the Labour saviour, but has spent the election away from the camera so they might find under scrutiny he falls very short of the hype.
Starmer is too London, too left and too second referendum for the majority of the country but on the upside he can string a sentence together and be on top of his brief. He’s clearly and wisely attempting to pull in support from the Corbynista wing in his Guardian editorial but it remains to be seen how big an issue gender is in this race.
I think the gender thing is a bit of a myth.
Despite what’s said in public - where there’s really only one answer to be given - it’ll be the politics that determines which candidate is successful, not what they have between their legs.
In many areas of the public sector, or the Universities, gender equality is a very important principle in the awarding of jobs. (More so than in the private sector).
Labour's electorate will be drawn from these areas. I think Labour is uncomfortable already not having had a female leader when everyone else has -- and to run a competition with 3 woman and 1 man & elect the man will be too much.
It is not as though Starmer is demonstrably better than the female candidates.
Starmer is largely untested and probably worse than at least Nandy & Raynor, IMO.
Both the two front runners look too short to me at present. One of them might well win but recent experience has shown that outsiders can come up very fast, and neither is exactly flawless.
Anyway, my book is nice and green.
I was afraid you’d say that.
When did you get on Starmer, and at what price?
I've got nice and green by judiciously backing long shots and laying front runners at various stages. I've laid the following at odds of less than 10 at one point or another: Keir Starmer, Rebecca Long-Bailey, Jess Phillips, Clive Lewis, Dan Jarvis, Hillary Benn, David Miliband, Tom Watson, Owen Smith and Angela Eagle.
Keir Starmer has become green more or less by default as a result. Though I did back him at 32 and 34 in September 2016.
As an aside, does anyone else get a very suspicious looking advert for a 'Christmas bitcoin giveaway' on the top left of their screen? Give them 0.1 bitcoin and get 1 bitcoin back.
It's actually shifted the formatting of the webpage, so seems to me it might be more of a virus than a genuine advert...
Just been catching up on YouGov's latest favourability ratings - Corbyn completely in the basement, though poor Jo Swinson gets a terrible kicking as well - but also this stood out:
Nicola Sturgeon - net favourability... With 2017 Con voters: -77 With 2016 Leave voters: -70
Leaving aside the question of whether or not Johnson's intransigence over Indyref2 can survive another Nat or Nat/Green majority at Holyrood come 2021, one gathers the impression that his new voter coalition will not exactly be distraught at his refusal to play ball with the First Minister.
Whether this also indicates that the Tory base is truly committed to the Union, or if it's more the case that they don't care and are simply disinclined to listen to Scottish special pleading, who can say? More research required.
A Westminster Bubble way of looking at the world if ever I saw one.
Rather than looking at what 2017 Con voters and 2016 Leave voters think (or, more accurately, feel), ask yourself occasionally what Scots think (or, more accurately, feel).
The key to saving the Union lies in Scotland, not in England. But feel free to keep searching in the wrong place.
And - and I appreciate it’s not in your political interests to share that information - what is that key?
I think that one of things needed to be addressed by Boris & Co is a '24k mile service' on devolution - another of the Blair projects that has gone off half-cocked.
Quite how one engages the wibbling hatemongers of Sturgeon's Nutty Party is another question. Perhaps the problem is with the people in the leadership.
Once the Tories highlight their decades long record of backtracking, empty promises and downright opposition to Scottish devolution, I'm sure the wibbling hatemongers of Sturgeon's Nutty Party will be entirely amenable to engagement.
Have the Tories dissolved or suspended Holyrood yet, no
Did I say that the Tories have dissolved or suspended Holyrood? No.
Of course the tumescent threat implicit in that 'yet' is always telling from the proto Falangist wing of Unionism.
Mr. Thompson, that also misses out that the very helpful Speaker Bercow would've assisted the pro-EU Commons to add on a referendum amendment if they'd passed May's deal.
Remain had a majority in Parliament, particularly after the 2017 election, and conspired to bugger up their own chances.
RLB obviously has appeal to the "let me just find the most left-wing candidate" vote, which is maybe 35% of the membership. I'd sell Nandy - the Remain membership is resigned to leaving but I doubt if they actually want to embrace a Leaver as leader, and will not elect someone who was openly anti-Corbyn (Jess Phillips? Even more no.).
Starmer's interview in the Guardian today is pitch-perfect - as Wilson said, the party is best run from the centre-left, and we appreciate loyally doing your best even when out of favour. People feel it'd be nice to have a woman leader, other things being equal, but it's not decisive - we wouldn't elect Kate Hoey in a zillion years. His (female) PPS's point that "nobody asked me on the doorstep to find a leader with ovaries" is relevant.
But his snag - apart from his distinctly non-leftie air - is more that he's definitely an insider in Westminster - despite his interesting background, nobody in Wigan will feel he's going to understand them instinctively. If he can overcome that, I think he'll win; as the popular Rayner apparently isn't standing. Otherwise, RLB is probably the most likely.
Is Stella Creasy way too good to be in the running?
Mr. Thompson, that also misses out that the very helpful Speaker Bercow would've assisted the pro-EU Commons to add on a referendum amendment if they'd passed May's deal.
Remain had a majority in Parliament, particularly after the 2017 election, and conspired to bugger up their own chances.
Yes, as a Remainer I have to say the Remainers in Parliament made total wazzocks of themselves. They had the May deal, which was a good deal and would have effectively allowed the BINO that any sensible Remainer would have been angling for. They rejected it, despite being offered everything they were asking for to pass it. They then get Boris Johnson and are amazed when he not only slings Northern Ireland under his infamous bus to sign a much worse deal with the EU, but then uses their own tactics to turn the people against parliament and win a stonking majority for it.
The Liberal Democrats at least had a clear consistent message, but Starmer was just embarrassing. I am not at all sure he would be a better leader than Wrong Daily.
I may live to regret it but his odds at present seem to exhibit the classic Betfair centrist bias for metro candidates that its punters continually fall for.
I think with Starmer he’s been elevated to some kind of mythical status by centrists as the Labour saviour, but has spent the election away from the camera so they might find under scrutiny he falls very short of the hype.
Starmer is too London, too left and too second referendum for the majority of the country but on the upside he can string a sentence together and be on top of his brief. He’s clearly and wisely attempting to pull in support from the Corbynista wing in his Guardian editorial but it remains to be seen how big an issue gender is in this race.
I think the gender thing is a bit of a myth.
Despite what’s said in public - where there’s really only one answer to be given - it’ll be the politics that determines which candidate is successful, not what they have between their legs.
In many areas of the public sector, or the Universities, gender equality is a very important principle in the awarding of jobs. (More so than in the private sector).
Labour's electorate will be drawn from these areas. I think Labour is uncomfortable already not having had a female leader when everyone else has -- and to run a competition with 3 woman and 1 man & elect the man will be too much.
It is not as though Starmer is demonstrably better than the female candidates.
Starmer is largely untested and probably worse than at least Nandy & Raynor, IMO.
What you’re referring to is ideology, albeit gender equality ideology.
There are other - more important - strands to the ideology of Labour’s grassroots that they consider even more important.
Both the two front runners look too short to me at present. One of them might well win but recent experience has shown that outsiders can come up very fast, and neither is exactly flawless.
Anyway, my book is nice and green.
I was afraid you’d say that.
When did you get on Starmer, and at what price?
I've got nice and green by judiciously backing long shots and laying front runners at various stages. I've laid the following at odds of less than 10 at one point or another: Keir Starmer, Rebecca Long-Bailey, Jess Phillips, Clive Lewis, Dan Jarvis, Hillary Benn, David Miliband, Tom Watson, Owen Smith and Angela Eagle.
Keir Starmer has become green more or less by default as a result. Though I did back him at 32 and 34 in September 2016.
Nick. You were very close with your GE Tory majority prediction of 60 seats, despite it being very far from what you would have wanted to happen.
Care to share your thoughts on the current value bets in the Labour leadership election?
RLB obviously has appeal to the "let me just find the most left-wing candidate" vote, which is maybe 35% of the membership. I'd sell Nandy - the Remain membership is resigned to leaving but I doubt if they actually want to embrace a Leaver as leader, and will not elect someone who was openly anti-Corbyn (Jess Phillips? Even more no.).
Starmer's interview in the Guardian today is pitch-perfect - as Wilson said, the party is best run from the centre-left, and we appreciate loyally doing your best even when out of favour. People feel it'd be nice to have a woman leader, other things being equal, but it's not decisive - we wouldn't elect Kate Hoey in a zillion years. His (female) PPS's point that "nobody asked me on the doorstep to find a leader with ovaries" is relevant.
But his snag - apart from his distinctly non-leftie air - is more that he's definitely an insider in Westminster - despite his interesting background, nobody in Wigan will feel he's going to understand them instinctively. If he can overcome that, I think he'll win; as the popular Rayner apparently isn't standing. Otherwise, RLB is probably the most likely.
I haven’t said this for a while, but I think Nick Palmer is 100% correct. I’d back Lisa Nandy if she made the contest, but I doubt she will. Starmer has an audience ready to listen and has an excellent chance, though will be out organised by Ling Bailey, who will have Unite and Momentum on her side. A lot of that Corbyn vote was personal, not political.
Remain politicians having lost the referendum still thought they were right and acted like gamblers in a hole thinking they could bet bigger to win. Time and again they increased the stakes thinking that they'd win the next round and thus get out of the hole. Rather than taking a small loss (May's very soft Brexit deal) they wanted to win altogether so kept going 'double or quits'.
Now they've lost everything. They've gone from a soft deal negotiated by a Remain PM with trade negotiations going through a Remain Parliament to a much harder deal negotiated by a Vote Leave PM with trade negotiations going through a thumping majority for Leave Parliament.
You have to agree its a better overall outcome though? At least now we have leavers actually taking ownership of what's going to happen next. If it works better than the remainers expect then that's great for everybody, if it's as bad as they think then they can either push to rejoin or gradually ratchet it back to something softer. That's better than getting what from the Remain people's point of view was a fairly hard brexit, yet somehow they end up taking the blame for it, and if it goes badly the next move if it goes badly is to work out how to rip up the deal and come up with the *real* brexit.
How can Starmer be so short if the electorate is broadly that who voted in Corbyn easily two or three times
Because he reflects what labour 'should' do. Not what they will do.
Having said that, I don't think Starmer is the answer, he seems too stand-offish and disconnected and cold.
And that's the problem Labour has - who actually is centralist(ish), not disconnected (to the lost northern voters), presentable and able to pass the hurdles to get into the final vote?
I may live to regret it but his odds at present seem to exhibit the classic Betfair centrist bias for metro candidates that its punters continually fall for.
I think with Starmer he’s been elevated to some kind of mythical status by centrists as the Labour saviour, but has spent the election away from the camera so they might find under scrutiny he falls very short of the hype.
Starmer is too London, too left and too second referendum for the majority of the country but on the upside he can string a sentence together and be on top of his brief. He’s clearly and wisely attempting to pull in support from the Corbynista wing in his Guardian editorial but it remains to be seen how big an issue gender is in this race.
I think the gender thing is a bit of a myth.
Despite what’s said in public - where there’s really only one answer to be given - it’ll be the politics that determines which candidate is successful, not what they have between their legs.
The Lib Dems should have demonstrated that. They chose the wrong candidate because of her lacking a Y chromosome and as a result they lost seats. There's no way the Lib Dems, who made the decision to have the election in the first place, should have lost seats and under Davey I doubt they would have.
The best leader not the best genitals is what should be getting looked for. From whomever that may be and if that is a woman then great but if its not that's fine too.
Said candidate would be outraged by the suggestion that the lack of a Y chromosome had anything to do with being a 'her'.
How can Starmer be so short if the electorate is broadly that who voted in Corbyn easily two or three times
Because he reflects what labour 'should' do. Not what they will do.
Having said that, I don't think Starmer is the answer, he seems too stand-offish and disconnected and cold.
And that's the problem Labour has - who actually is centralist(ish), not disconnected (to the lost northern voters), presentable and able to pass the hurdles to get into the final vote?
I may live to regret it but his odds at present seem to exhibit the classic Betfair centrist bias for metro candidates that its punters continually fall for.
I think with Starmer he’s been elevated to some kind of mythical status by centrists as the Labour saviour, but has spent the election away from the camera so they might find under scrutiny he falls very short of the hype.
Starmer is too London, too left and too second referendum for the majority of the country but on the upside he can string a sentence together and be on top of his brief. He’s clearly and wisely attempting to pull in support from the Corbynista wing in his Guardian editorial but it remains to be seen how big an issue gender is in this race.
I agree on Starmer, and being very red on him have every incentive to do so. Of the boxes to be ticked, he ticks none of them, except for the very large one marked ‘new messiah wanted’. And he only gets near that box on account of his moderateness and superficial appearance.
The expectation must be that Labour members will find it impossible to swallow all their medicine in one go and will start with RLB as the first of sequence of leaders from the left. Or there’s a small chance they will feel brave enough to gamble on someone from the centre like Nandy.
Ed Miliband and Corbyn have already been leaders from the left, RLB strikes me more as Ed Miliband than real radical though
She is McDonnell left. The McDonnell left thought Ed Miliband was a Blairite!
Every time there was about to be a moment of agreement, he has been there, agitating against it. One by one, Left-leaning and centrist politicians and campaigners moved away from hoping for a soft Brexit and towards the idea that the whole thing could be cancelled. This was Tony Blair’s masterplan, and he executed it with aplomb.
The consequences of this historic pivot against compromise are still being felt: it not only scuppered Theresa May’s Brexit deal (which two years previously most Labour MPs would have been delighted with), it has greatly added to divisions in the country, perhaps for a generation. Whichever side finally triumphs, we can be certain that one half of the population will now feel bitterly defeated.
So next time the high-priest of reasonableness pops up on your television screen, remember this: on Brexit, his legacy has been to destroy the very “sensible centre” that he still fancifully calls his own.
How dare he talk sense on how to win elections? Doesn’t he know that’s much less important than supporting racists and terrorists and that the British people are just too thick to know what’s good for them?
Anyway, what would he know about winning elections? All he ever did was wage illegal wars and quarrel with his Chancellor. Jeremy Corbyn didn’t do such horrible things. He stood up for the poor and dispossessed and single mothers like his mate Jenny Formby and the oppressed minorities like members of Unite and Hamas. He is a Good Person not a war criminal.
(Seriously, it has come to something when Blair is the last Labour politician offering a rational analysis of the mess they’re in. And it will be actively rejected because it’s his message.)
So I was thinking of joining the Labour Party to help them out with their Crazy Person infestation, hopefully they'll return the favour later and give me a hand with my cave crickets.
Anybody know: * I'm a British citizen but not a UK resident, and the Labour Party took away my right to vote in British elections. But can I still join the Labour Party and vote on their leader? * Logistically, would the ballot get to Japan and back in time?
You can vote online, and I think it's unlikely that you'd be refused. I'd lived in Switzerland and Denmark for 30 years as a party member and don't remember any problem.
Sorry to hear about the crickets! Try not to use horrible glue traps though...
Great, thanks.
I'm not really bothered about the bugs, apparently they don't carry any particular diseases and they eat some of the insects that do.
Nick. You were very close with your GE Tory majority prediction of 60 seats, despite it being very far from what you would have wanted to happen.
Care to share your thoughts on the current value bets in the Labour leadership election?
RLB obviously has appeal to the "let me just find the most left-wing candidate" vote, which is maybe 35% of the membership. I'd sell Nandy - the Remain membership is resigned to leaving but I doubt if they actually want to embrace a Leaver as leader, and will not elect someone who was openly anti-Corbyn (Jess Phillips? Even more no.).
Starmer's interview in the Guardian today is pitch-perfect - as Wilson said, the party is best run from the centre-left, and we appreciate loyally doing your best even when out of favour. People feel it'd be nice to have a woman leader, other things being equal, but it's not decisive - we wouldn't elect Kate Hoey in a zillion years. His (female) PPS's point that "nobody asked me on the doorstep to find a leader with ovaries" is relevant.
But his snag - apart from his distinctly non-leftie air - is more that he's definitely an insider in Westminster - despite his interesting background, nobody in Wigan will feel he's going to understand them instinctively. If he can overcome that, I think he'll win; as the popular Rayner apparently isn't standing. Otherwise, RLB is probably the most likely.
Nick. You were very close with your GE Tory majority prediction of 60 seats, despite it being very far from what you would have wanted to happen.
Care to share your thoughts on the current value bets in the Labour leadership election?
RLB obviously has appeal to the "let me just find the most left-wing candidate" vote, which is maybe 35% of the membership. I'd sell Nandy - the Remain membership is resigned to leaving but I doubt if they actually want to embrace a Leaver as leader, and will not elect someone who was openly anti-Corbyn (Jess Phillips? Even more no.).
Starmer's interview in the Guardian today is pitch-perfect - as Wilson said, the party is best run from the centre-left, and we appreciate loyally doing your best even when out of favour. People feel it'd be nice to have a woman leader, other things being equal, but it's not decisive - we wouldn't elect Kate Hoey in a zillion years. His (female) PPS's point that "nobody asked me on the doorstep to find a leader with ovaries" is relevant.
But his snag - apart from his distinctly non-leftie air - is more that he's definitely an insider in Westminster - despite his interesting background, nobody in Wigan will feel he's going to understand them instinctively. If he can overcome that, I think he'll win; as the popular Rayner apparently isn't standing. Otherwise, RLB is probably the most likely.
I haven’t said this for a while, but I think Nick Palmer is 100% correct. I’d back Lisa Nandy if she made the contest, but I doubt she will. Starmer has an audience ready to listen and has an excellent chance, though will be out organised by Ling Bailey, who will have Unite and Momentum on her side. A lot of that Corbyn vote was personal, not political.
What a disgusting was to talk about a female leader "His (female) PPS's point that "nobody asked me on the doorstep to find a leader with ovaries" is relevant.""
I suppose that kind of talk is ok if a woman says it, but if it had been a man, all hell would have been let loose.
I may live to regret it but his odds at present seem to exhibit the classic Betfair centrist bias for metro candidates that its punters continually fall for.
I think with Starmer he’s been elevated to some kind of mythical status by centrists as the Labour saviour, but has spent the election away from the camera so they might find under scrutiny he falls very short of the hype.
Starmer is too London, too left and too second referendum for the majority of the country but on the upside he can string a sentence together and be on top of his brief. He’s clearly and wisely attempting to pull in support from the Corbynista wing in his Guardian editorial but it remains to be seen how big an issue gender is in this race.
I think the gender thing is a bit of a myth.
Despite what’s said in public - where there’s really only one answer to be given - it’ll be the politics that determines which candidate is successful, not what they have between their legs.
In many areas of the public sector, or the Universities, gender equality is a very important principle in the awarding of jobs. (More so than in the private sector).
Labour's electorate will be drawn from these areas. I think Labour is uncomfortable already not having had a female leader when everyone else has -- and to run a competition with 3 woman and 1 man & elect the man will be too much.
It is not as though Starmer is demonstrably better than the female candidates.
Starmer is largely untested and probably worse than at least Nandy & Raynor, IMO.
What you’re referring to is ideology, albeit gender equality ideology.
There are other - more important - strands to the ideology of Labour’s grassroots that they consider even more important.
The decision will be made in the round.
Correct. My guess is that Harriet Harman will not back Rebecca Ling Bailey if the contest is her v Starmer.
How can Starmer be so short if the electorate is broadly that who voted in Corbyn easily two or three times
Because he reflects what labour 'should' do. Not what they will do.
Having said that, I don't think Starmer is the answer, he seems too stand-offish and disconnected and cold.
And that's the problem Labour has - who actually is centralist(ish), not disconnected (to the lost northern voters), presentable and able to pass the hurdles to get into the final vote?
Anyone who is not part of the London labour clique. It has to be someone outwith the M25
Mr. Thompson, that also misses out that the very helpful Speaker Bercow would've assisted the pro-EU Commons to add on a referendum amendment if they'd passed May's deal.
Remain had a majority in Parliament, particularly after the 2017 election, and conspired to bugger up their own chances.
Yes, as a Remainer I have to say the Remainers in Parliament made total wazzocks of themselves. They had the May deal, which was a good deal and would have effectively allowed the BINO that any sensible Remainer would have been angling for. They rejected it, despite being offered everything they were asking for to pass it. They then get Boris Johnson and are amazed when he not only slings Northern Ireland under his infamous bus to sign a much worse deal with the EU, but then uses their own tactics to turn the people against parliament and win a stonking majority for it.
The Liberal Democrats at least had a clear consistent message, but Starmer was just embarrassing. I am not at all sure he would be a better leader than Wrong Daily.
Starmer, Benn, Cooper, Blair, Grieve, Letwin, Major, Heseltine and all the others were first beaten by a bus and then outmaneuvered by Mark Francois.
I may live to regret it but his odds at present seem to exhibit the classic Betfair centrist bias for metro candidates that its punters continually fall for.
I think with Starmer he’s been elevated to some kind of mythical status by centrists as the Labour saviour, but has spent the election away from the camera so they might find under scrutiny he falls very short of the hype.
Starmer is too London, too left and too second referendum for the majority of the country but on the upside he can string a sentence together and be on top of his brief. He’s clearly and wisely attempting to pull in support from the Corbynista wing in his Guardian editorial but it remains to be seen how big an issue gender is in this race.
I agree on Starmer, and being very red on him have every incentive to do so. Of the boxes to be ticked, he ticks none of them, except for the very large one marked ‘new messiah wanted’. And he only gets near that box on account of his moderateness and superficial appearance.
The expectation must be that Labour members will find it impossible to swallow all their medicine in one go and will start with RLB as the first of sequence of leaders from the left. Or there’s a small chance they will feel brave enough to gamble on someone from the centre like Nandy.
Ed Miliband and Corbyn have already been leaders from the left, RLB strikes me more as Ed Miliband than real radical though
She is McDonnell left. The McDonnell left thought Ed Miliband was a Blairite!
How can Starmer be so short if the electorate is broadly that who voted in Corbyn easily two or three times
Because he reflects what labour 'should' do. Not what they will do.
Having said that, I don't think Starmer is the answer, he seems too stand-offish and disconnected and cold.
And that's the problem Labour has - who actually is centralist(ish), not disconnected (to the lost northern voters), presentable and able to pass the hurdles to get into the final vote?
Nandy is good but I wonder which would be better with the lost elderly northern voters, somebody who looks competent and sounds reassuring like their idea of what a Prime Minster should sound like, or someone who convincingly affects to have a way to stop the young people leaving Barnsley. I'm not sure, but I don't think it's a slam-dunk.
Labour have been very critical of many organisations over female representation at the very top (e.g FTSE companies).
The Metropolitan Police, Oxford and Cambridge University, MI5, the Tories & all other political parties, Scotland, the European Commission have all had women at the very top.
Even the DUP. Even UKIP. The NZ Labour Party. The Australian Labor Party.
Are Labour really going to be able to have a competition for the top job between 3 or 4 women and 1 man .... and choose the man?
If any other organisation did this, Labour would be lecturing them on unconscious bias and discrimination.
IMO, Starmer is better off doing a Raynor, and pushing for deputy position behind Nandy.
If it was a board of directors making the appointment then your point on choosing a woman would be valid. But it is hundreds of thousands of individuals making the choice. I suspect the gender issue will not be top of most lists in making their choice.
Mr. Thompson, that also misses out that the very helpful Speaker Bercow would've assisted the pro-EU Commons to add on a referendum amendment if they'd passed May's deal.
Remain had a majority in Parliament, particularly after the 2017 election, and conspired to bugger up their own chances.
Yes, as a Remainer I have to say the Remainers in Parliament made total wazzocks of themselves. They had the May deal, which was a good deal and would have effectively allowed the BINO that any sensible Remainer would have been angling for. They rejected it, despite being offered everything they were asking for to pass it. They then get Boris Johnson and are amazed when he not only slings Northern Ireland under his infamous bus to sign a much worse deal with the EU, but then uses their own tactics to turn the people against parliament and win a stonking majority for it.
The Liberal Democrats at least had a clear consistent message, but Starmer was just embarrassing. I am not at all sure he would be a better leader than Wrong Daily.
Starmer, Benn, Cooper, Blair, Grieve, Letwin, Major, Heseltine and all the others were first beaten by a bus and then outmaneuvered by Mark Francois.
That’s an amazing thought. Mark Francois would have difficulty getting the better of my Year 7s in a game of draughts.
I may live to regret it but his odds at present seem to exhibit the classic Betfair centrist bias for metro candidates that its punters continually fall for.
I think with Starmer he’s been elevated to some kind of mythical status by centrists as the Labour saviour, but has spent the election away from the camera so they might find under scrutiny he falls very short of the hype.
Starmer is too London, too left and too second referendum for the majority of the country but on the upside he can string a sentence together and be on top of his brief. He’s clearly and wisely attempting to pull in support from the Corbynista wing in his Guardian editorial but it remains to be seen how big an issue gender is in this race.
I think the gender thing is a bit of a myth.
Despite what’s said in public - where there’s really only one answer to be given - it’ll be the politics that determines which candidate is successful, not what they have between their legs.
But much of the politics is determined by what they have between their legs - especially in Lab, but also elsewhere. There are all kinds of party structures that depend exactly on that - starting with gender-based selection for candidates and things such as a day at conferences where people who happen to have a penis are excluded.
Has anyone worked through the impact of the results on the gender debate within Labour?
A good number of well-established MPs have been culled by defections to eg CUK, or by loss in the election (eg Mary Creagh, Chuka, Frank Field). And quite a few new ones have come in where they replaced safe seat MPs retiring.
Every time there was about to be a moment of agreement, he has been there, agitating against it. One by one, Left-leaning and centrist politicians and campaigners moved away from hoping for a soft Brexit and towards the idea that the whole thing could be cancelled. This was Tony Blair’s masterplan, and he executed it with aplomb.
The consequences of this historic pivot against compromise are still being felt: it not only scuppered Theresa May’s Brexit deal (which two years previously most Labour MPs would have been delighted with), it has greatly added to divisions in the country, perhaps for a generation. Whichever side finally triumphs, we can be certain that one half of the population will now feel bitterly defeated.
So next time the high-priest of reasonableness pops up on your television screen, remember this: on Brexit, his legacy has been to destroy the very “sensible centre” that he still fancifully calls his own.
It reminds me of a biblical tale; the defeated could honourably settle for a not that bad option or forgo their principles to chase a pot of gold. The contortions people made to convince themselves that voting against every deal and trying to get a 2nd referendum was perfectly right and proper were extraordinary. They’ll look back and laugh one day when they get over themselves
When 60,70,80? members on the right of the Tory party rebelled against May’s deal, did anyone in Labour stop to think that maybe, just maybe, that it could have been something they should have been supporting from a leave standpoint?
As opposed to the ridiculous position where they officially opposed the backstop because of legal advice that it could be permanent, whilst simultaneously making clear that the main difference of a Labour negotiated Brexit would be the presence of a, er, permanent customs union? (aka the backstop)
I may live to regret it but his odds at present seem to exhibit the classic Betfair centrist bias for metro candidates that its punters continually fall for.
I think with Starmer he’s been elevated to some kind of mythical status by centrists as the Labour saviour, but has spent the election away from the camera so they might find under scrutiny he falls very short of the hype.
Starmer is too London, too left and too second referendum for the majority of the country but on the upside he can string a sentence together and be on top of his brief. He’s clearly and wisely attempting to pull in support from the Corbynista wing in his Guardian editorial but it remains to be seen how big an issue gender is in this race.
I think the gender thing is a bit of a myth.
Despite what’s said in public - where there’s really only one answer to be given - it’ll be the politics that determines which candidate is successful, not what they have between their legs.
But much of the politics is determined by what they have between their legs - especially in Lab, but also elsewhere. There are all kinds of party structures that depend exactly on that - starting with gender-based selection for candidates and things such as a day at conferences where people who happen to have a penis are excluded.
Has anyone worked through the impact of the results on the gender debate within Labour?
A good number of well-established MPs have been culled by defections to eg CUK, or by loss in the election (eg Mary Creagh, Chuka, Frank Field). And quite a few new ones have come in where they replaced safe seat MPs retiring.
The latter are overwhelmingly female.
What is the new balance of views?
Worth pointing out there are now more female labour MPs than male MPs I believe.
When 60,70,80? members on the right of the Tory party rebelled against May’s deal, did anyone in Labour stop to think that maybe, just maybe, that it could have been something they should have been supporting from a leave standpoint?
As opposed to the ridiculous position where they officially opposed the backstop because of legal advice that it could be permanent, whilst simultaneously making clear that the main difference of a Labour negotiated Brexit would be the presence of a, er, permanent customs union? (aka the backstop)
If May's deal had been passed on Labour votes then the Conservatives would have ripped themselves apart.
I'm green on Keir Starmer, Rebecca Long-Bailey, Jess Phillips, Lisa Nandy, Emily Thornberry, Angela Rayner, Yvette Cooper ( and Ed Balls - how did that happen!). Red on David Lammy and Clive Lewis.
I may live to regret it but his odds at present seem to exhibit the classic Betfair centrist bias for metro candidates that its punters continually fall for.
I think with Starmer he’s been elevated to some kind of mythical status by centrists as the Labour saviour, but has spent the election away from the camera so they might find under scrutiny he falls very short of the hype.
Starmer is too London, too left and too second referendum for the majority of the country but on the upside he can string a sentence together and be on top of his brief. He’s clearly and wisely attempting to pull in support from the Corbynista wing in his Guardian editorial but it remains to be seen how big an issue gender is in this race.
I think the gender thing is a bit of a myth.
Despite what’s said in public - where there’s really only one answer to be given - it’ll be the politics that determines which candidate is successful, not what they have between their legs.
In many areas of the public sector, or the Universities, gender equality is a very important principle in the awarding of jobs. (More so than in the private sector).
Labour's electorate will be drawn from these areas. I think Labour is uncomfortable already not having had a female leader when everyone else has -- and to run a competition with 3 woman and 1 man & elect the man will be too much.
It is not as though Starmer is demonstrably better than the female candidates.
Starmer is largely untested and probably worse than at least Nandy & Raynor, IMO.
What you’re referring to is ideology, albeit gender equality ideology.
There are other - more important - strands to the ideology of Labour’s grassroots that they consider even more important.
The decision will be made in the round.
Correct. My guess is that Harriet Harman will not back Rebecca Ling Bailey if the contest is her v Starmer.
Isn’t Harman at least partly responsible for the whole Corbyn madness though? She as acting leader convinced the shad cab to support the government’s welfare cap, which ended up being the ‘wedge’ issue on which Corbyn distinguished himself from the other candidates having voted against it?
The right and far left hate Tony Blair. They share this passion because Blair was successful.
I don’t think so. I’d guess the Corbynite left hate him for bombing Iraq more than they do for winning elections where Jez, Abbott and McD were MPs, and I wouldn’t call that venture successful.
Every time there was about to be a moment of agreement, he has been there, agitating against it. One by one, Left-leaning and centrist politicians and campaigners moved away from hoping for a soft Brexit and towards the idea that the whole thing could be cancelled. This was Tony Blair’s masterplan, and he executed it with aplomb.
The consequences of this historic pivot against compromise are still being felt: it not only scuppered Theresa May’s Brexit deal (which two years previously most Labour MPs would have been delighted with), it has greatly added to divisions in the country, perhaps for a generation. Whichever side finally triumphs, we can be certain that one half of the population will now feel bitterly defeated.
So next time the high-priest of reasonableness pops up on your television screen, remember this: on Brexit, his legacy has been to destroy the very “sensible centre” that he still fancifully calls his own.
Good argument. As long as it is not being made by somebody trying to argue against Corbyn’s approach being equally disastrous. Blair campaigned tirelessly to prevent Labour remainers seeking compromise with the electorate. And lost. Corbyn’s approach did the same with Labour leavers. And lost.
Apart from those of you aiming to make money on the identity of the next Labour leader, my initial thought was "who cares"? I see that Keir Starmer has set out his "manifesto" in today's Guardian. Isn't that just a perfect summary of the Labour Party's problems. Traditional, working class, former Labour voting citizens have nothing in common with rich, metropolitan, usually privately educated lawyers who claim to be socialists and live the lives of uber capitalists. Working class people in Lancashire read the Daily Mirror or the Daily Express, not the Guardian!
I'm green on Keir Starmer, Rebecca Long-Bailey, Jess Phillips, Lisa Nandy, Emily Thornberry, Angela Rayner, Yvette Cooper ( and Ed Balls - how did that happen!). Red on David Lammy and Clive Lewis.
Ed Balls was brilliantly tipped at 100/1 in 2016 in a PB thread header.
Apart from those of you aiming to make money on the identity of the next Labour leader, my initial thought was "who cares"? I see that Keir Starmer has set out his "manifesto" in today's Guardian. Isn't that just a perfect summary of the Labour Party's problems. Traditional, working class, former Labour voting citizens have nothing in common with rich, metropolitan, usually privately educated lawyers who claim to be socialists and live the lives of uber capitalists. Working class people in Lancashire read the Daily Mirror or the Daily Express, not the Guardian!
Starmer was born into a working class family and achieved everything he has thanks to the aspiration of his parents, his own skills and ability and, crucially, the protections and backstop the post-war welfare state created. It’s a story that is very familiar to tens of millions of ordinary voters. Working class people want the best for their families, just like everyone else. They are not a different breed!
I'm green on Keir Starmer, Rebecca Long-Bailey, Jess Phillips, Lisa Nandy, Emily Thornberry, Angela Rayner, Yvette Cooper ( and Ed Balls - how did that happen!). Red on David Lammy and Clive Lewis.
Ed Balls was brilliantly tipped at 100/1 in 2016 in a PB thread header.
I'm green on Keir Starmer, Rebecca Long-Bailey, Jess Phillips, Lisa Nandy, Emily Thornberry, Angela Rayner, Yvette Cooper ( and Ed Balls - how did that happen!). Red on David Lammy and Clive Lewis.
Ed Balls was brilliantly tipped at 100/1 in 2016 in a PB thread header.
Nick. You were very close with your GE Tory majority prediction of 60 seats, despite it being very far from what you would have wanted to happen.
Care to share your thoughts on the current value bets in the Labour leadership election?
RLB obviously has appeal to the "let me just find the most left-wing candidate" vote, which is maybe 35% of the membership. I'd sell Nandy - the Remain membership is resigned to leaving but I doubt if they actually want to embrace a Leaver as leader, and will not elect someone who was openly anti-Corbyn (Jess Phillips? Even more no.).
Starmer's interview in the Guardian today is pitch-perfect - as Wilson said, the party is best run from the centre-left, and we appreciate loyally doing your best even when out of favour. People feel it'd be nice to have a woman leader, other things being equal, but it's not decisive - we wouldn't elect Kate Hoey in a zillion years. His (female) PPS's point that "nobody asked me on the doorstep to find a leader with ovaries" is relevant.
But his snag - apart from his distinctly non-leftie air - is more that he's definitely an insider in Westminster - despite his interesting background, nobody in Wigan will feel he's going to understand them instinctively. If he can overcome that, I think he'll win; as the popular Rayner apparently isn't standing. Otherwise, RLB is probably the most likely.
I haven’t said this for a while, but I think Nick Palmer is 100% correct. I’d back Lisa Nandy if she made the contest, but I doubt she will. Starmer has an audience ready to listen and has an excellent chance, though will be out organised by Ling Bailey, who will have Unite and Momentum on her side. A lot of that Corbyn vote was personal, not political.
Starmer comes across as a humourless technocrat, like Gordon Brown or Alistair Darling. Jess Phillips or Lisa Nandy would be a better choice IMO.
"Quick, I need a city beginning with A!!!" "Aberdeen?" "Too Scottish" "Abergavenny?" "Too Welsh" "Andover?" "God have you been there? No" "OK, how about Abbotsford?" "Brilliant! Scottish but sounds English! I'll take it!" "Good"
Pause
"Now get off my doorstep and go home Francesca, you psycho"
In Scottish terms Abbotsford isn't even a place as such, just the made up name of a country house. Perhaps Franny has lots of pals among the tour guides.
I'm green on Keir Starmer, Rebecca Long-Bailey, Jess Phillips, Lisa Nandy, Emily Thornberry, Angela Rayner, Yvette Cooper ( and Ed Balls - how did that happen!). Red on David Lammy and Clive Lewis.
Ed Balls was brilliantly tipped at 100/1 in 2016 in a PB thread header.
The right and far left hate Tony Blair. They share this passion because Blair was successful.
I thought I hated Tony Blair until first Gordon Brown, then Ed Miliband and finally Jeremy bloody Corbyn came along. And it turned out what I'd felt for Tony Blair was 'mild dislike'. Makes me nostalgic for the days when I merely worried Labour would take the country in the wrong direction rather than absolutely destroy it, sowing the ground with salt as it did so.
Apart from those of you aiming to make money on the identity of the next Labour leader, my initial thought was "who cares"? I see that Keir Starmer has set out his "manifesto" in today's Guardian. Isn't that just a perfect summary of the Labour Party's problems. Traditional, working class, former Labour voting citizens have nothing in common with rich, metropolitan, usually privately educated lawyers who claim to be socialists and live the lives of uber capitalists. Working class people in Lancashire read the Daily Mirror or the Daily Express, not the Guardian!
Starmer was born into a working class family and achieved everything he has thanks to the aspiration of his parents, his own skills and ability and, crucially, the protections and backstop the post-war welfare state created. It’s a story that is very familiar to tens of millions of ordinary voters. Working class people want the best for their families, just like everyone else. They are not a different breed!
The problem though is the perception and not by any stretch of the imagination could anyone outside the M25 even start to consider Starmer as working class
Comments
Long Bailey is the dictionary definition of a fuck up waiting to happen - history repeating itself as farce.
Any selection that does not put Nandy in the mix is the dictionary definition of self harm.
But hey, this is the twenty first century Labour Party.
Where you have a point is that in the right, very favourable circumstances, new voters can be won over. The most remarkable thing about this election are the interviews with ‘always Labour’ northern folk expressing amazement and surprise about their own voting Tory. It’s taken them thirty years to overcome the memories of the 1980s. So political recollections aren’t wiped clean in a hurry.
Starmer's interview in the Guardian today is pitch-perfect - as Wilson said, the party is best run from the centre-left, and we appreciate loyally doing your best even when out of favour. People feel it'd be nice to have a woman leader, other things being equal, but it's not decisive - we wouldn't elect Kate Hoey in a zillion years. His (female) PPS's point that "nobody asked me on the doorstep to find a leader with ovaries" is relevant.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/dec/17/keir-starmer-labour-leadership-pitch-radical-government
But his snag - apart from his distinctly non-leftie air - is more that he's definitely an insider in Westminster - despite his interesting background, nobody in Wigan will feel he's going to understand them instinctively. If he can overcome that, I think he'll win; as the popular Rayner apparently isn't standing. Otherwise, RLB is probably the most likely.
The expectation must be that Labour members will find it impossible to swallow all their medicine in one go and will start with RLB as the first of sequence of leaders from the left. Or there’s a small chance they will feel brave enough to gamble on someone from the centre like Nandy.
Kicking myself about that. Hoping Thornberry announces she'll run and her odds come in significantly.
Now I'm:
RLB +20
Nandy +14
Starmer -210
Philips +400
Thornberry +600
The rest-150 (excluding some longshots who I can't lay)
Miliband -450
In hindsight it was all over when Boris got a new deal. I wonder at what point between agreement for a new deal and the announcement of the exit poll those people trying to stop Brexit worked out they’ve messed it all up.
Just....wow.
Labour have been very critical of many organisations over female representation at the very top (e.g FTSE companies).
The Metropolitan Police, Oxford and Cambridge University, MI5, the Tories & all other political parties, Scotland, the European Commission have all had women at the very top.
Even the DUP. Even UKIP. The NZ Labour Party. The Australian Labor Party.
Are Labour really going to be able to have a competition for the top job between 3 or 4 women and 1 man .... and choose the man?
If any other organisation did this, Labour would be lecturing them on unconscious bias and discrimination.
IMO, Starmer is better off doing a Raynor, and pushing for deputy position behind Nandy.
Anyway, my book is nice and green.
The Secretary of the Writers' Union
Had leaflets distributed on the Stalinallee
Stating that the people
Had forfeited the confidence of the government
And could only win it back
By increased work quotas. Would it not in that case be simpler
for the government
To dissolve the people
And elect another?
Despite what’s said in public - where there’s really only one answer to be given - it’ll be the politics that determines which candidate is successful, not what they have between their legs.
It’s far too early to be chasing the market, so I’m not.
I was afraid you’d say that.
When did you get on Starmer, and at what price?
Now it doesn’t always happen, but throughout history party front benches are generally populated by the better of their MPs, with politicians who are the best of their parties at or close to the peak of their abilities. The shadow Home Secretary is Diane Abbott.
Now they've lost everything. They've gone from a soft deal negotiated by a Remain PM with trade negotiations going through a Remain Parliament to a much harder deal negotiated by a Vote Leave PM with trade negotiations going through a thumping majority for Leave Parliament.
https://www.scotsman.com/news-2-15012/snp-accused-of-betrayal-over-new-delay-to-devolution-of-welfare-benefits-1-4881356
The best leader not the best genitals is what should be getting looked for. From whomever that may be and if that is a woman then great but if its not that's fine too.
Labour's electorate will be drawn from these areas. I think Labour is uncomfortable already not having had a female leader when everyone else has -- and to run a competition with 3 woman and 1 man & elect the man will be too much.
It is not as though Starmer is demonstrably better than the female candidates.
Starmer is largely untested and probably worse than at least Nandy & Raynor, IMO.
Keir Starmer has become green more or less by default as a result. Though I did back him at 32 and 34 in September 2016.
Give them 0.1 bitcoin and get 1 bitcoin back.
It's actually shifted the formatting of the webpage, so seems to me it might be more of a virus than a genuine advert...
Of course the tumescent threat implicit in that 'yet' is always telling from the proto Falangist wing of Unionism.
Remain had a majority in Parliament, particularly after the 2017 election, and conspired to bugger up their own chances.
Having said that, I don't think Starmer is the answer, he seems too stand-offish and disconnected and cold.
The Liberal Democrats at least had a clear consistent message, but Starmer was just embarrassing. I am not at all sure he would be a better leader than Wrong Daily.
https://imgur.com/a/yZGbN0X
Is there some way to report this to whoever the intermediary is that pb deals with?
https://twitter.com/InstituteGC/status/1207218937689264128?s=20
https://twitter.com/InstituteGC/status/1207219151732916224?s=20
https://twitter.com/InstituteGC/status/1207219326211829760?s=20
https://twitter.com/InstituteGC/status/1207219510576648194?s=20
https://twitter.com/InstituteGC/status/1207218407172694016?s=20
There are other - more important - strands to the ideology of Labour’s grassroots that they consider even more important.
The decision will be made in the round.
I laid Thornberry and David Miliband.
I just never backed Starmer.
The consequences of this historic pivot against compromise are still being felt: it not only scuppered Theresa May’s Brexit deal (which two years previously most Labour MPs would have been delighted with), it has greatly added to divisions in the country, perhaps for a generation. Whichever side finally triumphs, we can be certain that one half of the population will now feel bitterly defeated.
So next time the high-priest of reasonableness pops up on your television screen, remember this: on Brexit, his legacy has been to destroy the very “sensible centre” that he still fancifully calls his own.
https://unherd.com/2019/10/how-tony-blair-destroyed-the-centre-ground/
Anyway, what would he know about winning elections? All he ever did was wage illegal wars and quarrel with his Chancellor. Jeremy Corbyn didn’t do such horrible things. He stood up for the poor and dispossessed and single mothers like his mate Jenny Formby and the oppressed minorities like members of Unite and Hamas. He is a Good Person not a war criminal.
(Seriously, it has come to something when Blair is the last Labour politician offering a rational analysis of the mess they’re in. And it will be actively rejected because it’s his message.)
Now, that would make politics interesting again.
I'm not really bothered about the bugs, apparently they don't carry any particular diseases and they eat some of the insects that do.
Here's a really badly drawn picture of one from 13,000 BC.
I suppose that kind of talk is ok if a woman says it, but if it had been a man, all hell would have been let loose.
Has anyone worked through the impact of the results on the gender debate within Labour?
A good number of well-established MPs have been culled by defections to eg CUK, or by loss in the election (eg Mary Creagh, Chuka, Frank Field). And quite a few new ones have come in where they replaced safe seat MPs retiring.
The latter are overwhelmingly female.
What is the new balance of views?
As opposed to the ridiculous position where they officially opposed the backstop because of legal advice that it could be permanent, whilst simultaneously making clear that the main difference of a Labour negotiated Brexit would be the presence of a, er, permanent customs union? (aka the backstop)
Tell me why there's still women-only shortlists?
And we would now have a Corbyn government.
http://www2.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2016/09/03/everybody-salsa-for-the-real-labour-king-over-the-water/
#LegendaryModestyKlaxon
The Tyneside (and Wear) Labour councils are seemingly far better ran than their former Teesside compatriots..
http://www2.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2016/05/29/is-this-ed-milibands-route-back-to-the-labour-leadership/
http://www2.politicalbetting.com/index.php/archives/2016/02/08/guess-who-looking-for-jeremy-corbyns-successor-2/