If you’re going to need to hold onto northern Labour seats you need someone who voters there feel understands them . And someone who will be less polite and call out Johnson for the liar he is. I like Starmer but he needs to get down into the gutter and fight the Tories at their own game ,if he’s not willing to then pass the mantle to someone who will tell it like it is .
It might cause concerns but labour need a pro Brexit leader
They had one in 2019, and he shipped an 80 seat majority to Johnson.
BETTING POST: Angela Rayner is on manuevers. If there is a challenge to Starmer it won't be that wankshaft Burgon, it will be her. Angela thinks She is the one. Woman. Northern. Authentic.
I would probably vote for her.
Needs to be a woman IMO
Who would win if it was Rayner v Nandy in your opinion?
Rayner I would think
I voted for Nandy last time as the least bad of the 3 Candidates
Probably the hardest working ship in Britain - the Commodore Goodwill - is in sight out of my window, several hours later than usual on its daily return from the Channel Islands. Must have been held up somehow.
If you’re going to need to hold onto northern Labour seats you need someone who voters there feel understands them . And someone who will be less polite and call out Johnson for the liar he is. I like Starmer but he needs to get down into the gutter and fight the Tories at their own game ,if he’s not willing to then pass the mantle to someone who will tell it like it is .
It might cause concerns but labour need a pro Brexit leader
They had one in 2019, and he shipped an 80 seat majority to Johnson.
After capitulating to the Remoaner Majority and writing a suicide note Manifesto with peoples vote in it
1. There's no vacancy as leader of the Labour Party. Starmer isn't going anywhere for at least a year, even if tonight's results are horrendous. And there won't be a challenge.
2. Don't forget that Starmer won the leadership election hands down. The idea that there's any appetite for somebody like Burgon from the membership is ludicrous.
3. If Starmer were to jack it in, I'd expect both Rayner and Nandy to stand. Nandy would win, because she'd run a better, more articulate campaign and has the ability to appeal to all factions in the party apart from the far, far left who are, as can be seen from the last leader/deputy election, in retreat.
If Yvette is the answer you're asking the wrong questions.
Been saying for a long time the Tories didn't succeed by retreading those who were leftover from the past. Clarke would have made an amazing Shadow Chancellor, but the Tories were ready when Cameron & Osborne were ready. Similarly Brown himself was not a retread from the seventies.
Cooper is a Brownite retread from the past. Where's their Osborne? Where's their Brown?
BETTING POST: Angela Rayner is on manuevers. If there is a challenge to Starmer it won't be that wankshaft Burgon, it will be her. Angela thinks She is the one. Woman. Northern. Authentic.
She also won the Deputy Leadership comfortably. Indeed I think she would have won the leadership if she had stood instead of her flat mate.
She fell out with left. She even said nice things about Blair.
Yes, she has a very political ability to not accumulate enemies. I don't think she will have a problem with either left or right. She is able to unite the feuding factions.
Some of the momentum/Corbyn lot hate her. Apart from that, yeah.
"We love her for the enemies she's made"?
That was the famous phrase (substitute he for she) uttered at the Democratic National Convention of 1884 in support of then-Governor of New York for the Democratic presidential nomination. Because he was strong opponent of - and opposed as strongly by - Tammany Hall.
In the subsequent election, Tammany Hall sat on its hands and did NOT exert itself in support of Cleveland. Which was a BIG problem, because New York State was key to the election.
However, an over-eager supporter of the Republican nominee, James G. Blaine, made a speech in New York City a few days before Election Day, attacking the Democrats as the party of "Rum, Romanism and Rebellion".
Blaine was in the audience, but did NOT object to this statement. Which was noted AND publicized by the Cleveland campaign in NYC. Which had a LARGE contingent of Irish Catholic voters.
The result? Grover Cleveland won New York State (with 36 out of 401 electoral votes) by a popular vote margin of +1,047 votes over Blaine out of over 1m cast.
1. There's no vacancy as leader of the Labour Party. Starmer isn't going anywhere for at least a year, even if tonight's results are horrendous. And there won't be a challenge.
2. Don't forget that Starmer won the leadership election hands down. The idea that there's any appetite for somebody like Burgon from the membership is ludicrous.
3. If Starmer were to jack it in, I'd expect both Rayner and Nandy to stand. Nandy would win, because she'd run a better, more articulate campaign and has the ability to appeal to all factions in the party apart from the far, far left who are, as can be seen from the last leader/deputy election, in retreat.
If the results are horrendous, then the only reason there won't be a challenge to Skyr is because no-one in the party is hungry enough.
Boring hypothetical question for those following the Scottish election.
Would it be a better or worse system if parties had to stand for both constituency and list ballots? In pure choice terms there is an absolute glut of list parties but in constituency terms the choice is much more limited (some might say pathetically so).
I can't quite work out if it would be better, or if it would just kill a lot of the variety on the list.
Might get rid of the dross the parties have on their list backup system, all the chumocracy and deadwood careerists and arse lickers are on there. List is full of dross, mind you much of constituency is also dross so would it really matter that much.
DRoss is only on the list because he doesn’t have the guts to stand for his constituency and risk losing. Oh, sorry, I thought you meant DRoss, not dross.
BETTING POST: Angela Rayner is on manuevers. If there is a challenge to Starmer it won't be that wankshaft Burgon, it will be her. Angela thinks She is the one. Woman. Northern. Authentic.
Burgon has been campaigning for months. The left dislike Rayner intensely.
Just seen the graphics on the swings to Labour in various counties relative to 2017.
Minimal. The subtitles I picked up seemed to be a ray of hope narrative for Labour, but I was just thinking 'Ouch'. I mean, I know none of Kent, Essex or Leicestershire constitute Greater Remainia, but still. The NEV is likely to be painful.
I note the unity across the Labour church, that it needs to know what it stands for and have a bold vision (versions of which may differ wildly). You simply can't argue with that. I hope that is developed already and ready to get out there in the next 12 months of comparative normality, and that 2022 puts them in a somewhat different place.
Comments
I voted for Nandy last time as the least bad of the 3 Candidates
Deserved a good spanking
2. Don't forget that Starmer won the leadership election hands down. The idea that there's any appetite for somebody like Burgon from the membership is ludicrous.
3. If Starmer were to jack it in, I'd expect both Rayner and Nandy to stand. Nandy would win, because she'd run a better, more articulate campaign and has the ability to appeal to all factions in the party apart from the far, far left who are, as can be seen from the last leader/deputy election, in retreat.
Been saying for a long time the Tories didn't succeed by retreading those who were leftover from the past. Clarke would have made an amazing Shadow Chancellor, but the Tories were ready when Cameron & Osborne were ready. Similarly Brown himself was not a retread from the seventies.
Cooper is a Brownite retread from the past. Where's their Osborne? Where's their Brown?
That was the famous phrase (substitute he for she) uttered at the Democratic National Convention of 1884 in support of then-Governor of New York for the Democratic presidential nomination. Because he was strong opponent of - and opposed as strongly by - Tammany Hall.
In the subsequent election, Tammany Hall sat on its hands and did NOT exert itself in support of Cleveland. Which was a BIG problem, because New York State was key to the election.
However, an over-eager supporter of the Republican nominee, James G. Blaine, made a speech in New York City a few days before Election Day, attacking the Democrats as the party of "Rum, Romanism and Rebellion".
Blaine was in the audience, but did NOT object to this statement. Which was noted AND publicized by the Cleveland campaign in NYC. Which had a LARGE contingent of Irish Catholic voters.
The result? Grover Cleveland won New York State (with 36 out of 401 electoral votes) by a popular vote margin of +1,047 votes over Blaine out of over 1m cast.
Minimal. The subtitles I picked up seemed to be a ray of hope narrative for Labour, but I was just thinking 'Ouch'. I mean, I know none of Kent, Essex or Leicestershire constitute Greater Remainia, but still. The NEV is likely to be painful.
I note the unity across the Labour church, that it needs to know what it stands for and have a bold vision (versions of which may differ wildly). You simply can't argue with that. I hope that is developed already and ready to get out there in the next 12 months of comparative normality, and that 2022 puts them in a somewhat different place.