politicalbetting.com » Blog Archive » The Smith vs Corbyn debate showed a Labour Party talking to

ToryJim said:

david_herdson said:

Excellent article from Kieran, by the way. All the more so for having been written so quickly after the event - though I wouldn't be surprised if he knew what he was likely to write beforehand and only set it down once the reality lived up to his expectations/fears.

The sensible person would have written it entirely beforehand and tweaked it in light of the reality. Well that's what I'd have done anyway

Nah - always write after the event. Tweaking tends to bugger of the flow of an article and makes it too easy to introduce sentence structure errors. Having your main points sorted out in advance helps though.

If that clip is at all typical Keiran is far too kind in his analysis.

I am concerned that we are hearing so little from those MPs who supported a no confidence motion in Corbyn so recently. Are they scared of deselection or underwhelmed by Smith? They really need to work on the membership and make it clear that one has a team in Parliament who can work with him and one doesn't. That really is not being said loudly at the moment.

david_herdson said:

ToryJim said:

david_herdson said:

Jonathan said:

Are the Tories right wing these days?

If you believe the Labour candidates and their supporters, it's the 'most right wing' Tory government ever. But then it always is.

I bet we are doing our semi annual privatisation of the NHS too

Yes. Considering that the Conservatives have run the NHS for 41 of its 68 years, we must be staggeringly incompetent not to have privatised it yet. That or we just don't want to do it.

Or you have a really, really cunning plan.

Overnight POTUS Polling :

Clinton 47 .. Trump 38 - NBC/WSJ
Clinton 48 .. Trump 33 - Marist/McClatchy

https://www.scribd.com/document/320223703/16579-NBCWSJ-August-Poll-8-4-Release

https://www.scribd.com/document/320225575/McClatchy-Marist-Poll-National-Nature-of-the-Sample-and-Tables-August-2016

david_herdson said:

ToryJim said:

david_herdson said:

Jonathan said:

Are the Tories right wing these days?

If you believe the Labour candidates and their supporters, it's the 'most right wing' Tory government ever. But then it always is.

I bet we are doing our semi annual privatisation of the NHS too

Yes. Considering that the Conservatives have run the NHS for 41 of its 68 years, we must be staggeringly incompetent not to have privatised it yet. That or we just don't want to do it.

On the other hand that does mean that the Tories (and surely 5 of those years were Coalition?) Have to take ownership of a lot of the problems within the NHS.

PF2 is being touted as the new solution, and to be fair it is better than PF1. In Leicester we are expecting to build our new ambulatory care hospital and childrens hospital with it:

http://www.buildingbetterhealthcare.co.uk/news/article_page/Will_PF2_give_health_sector_schemes_a_shot_in_the_arm/91738

rcs1000 said:

david_herdson said:

ToryJim said:

david_herdson said:

Jonathan said:

Are the Tories right wing these days?

If you believe the Labour candidates and their supporters, it's the 'most right wing' Tory government ever. But then it always is.

I bet we are doing our semi annual privatisation of the NHS too

Yes. Considering that the Conservatives have run the NHS for 41 of its 68 years, we must be staggeringly incompetent not to have privatised it yet. That or we just don't want to do it.

Or you have a really, really cunning plan.

Finally got around to reading your colleague's piece on the ineffectiveness of the ECB and the foolishness of negative interest rate policies. Very good. I had not appreciated the point about regulatory risk being such an ongoing issue before.

For those who didn't see it and are interested: http://www.thstailwinds.com/714-2/

foxinsoxuk said:

david_herdson said:

ToryJim said:

david_herdson said:

Jonathan said:

Are the Tories right wing these days?

If you believe the Labour candidates and their supporters, it's the 'most right wing' Tory government ever. But then it always is.

I bet we are doing our semi annual privatisation of the NHS too

Yes. Considering that the Conservatives have run the NHS for 41 of its 68 years, we must be staggeringly incompetent not to have privatised it yet. That or we just don't want to do it.

On the other hand that does mean that the Tories (and surely 5 of those years were Coalition?) Have to take ownership of a lot of the problems within the NHS.

PF2 is being touted as the new solution, and to be fair it is better than PF1. In Leicester we are expecting to build our new ambulatory care hospital and childrens hospital with it:

http://www.buildingbetterhealthcare.co.uk/news/article_page/Will_PF2_give_health_sector_schemes_a_shot_in_the_arm/91738

Any idea of borrowing even more money to finance the NHS should be stamped on from a great height. We will be paying for Browns lunacies of private financing long after I am dead.

JackW said:

Overnight POTUS Polling :

Clinton 47 .. Trump 38 - NBC/WSJ
Clinton 48 .. Trump 33 - Marist/McClatchy

https://www.scribd.com/document/320223703/16579-NBCWSJ-August-Poll-8-4-Release

https://www.scribd.com/document/320225575/McClatchy-Marist-Poll-National-Nature-of-the-Sample-and-Tables-August-2016

Jack,

Any idea how these would give in EV? Based on UNS imperfect as it is.

Looks like you are going to remain TOTY

MattW said:

On topic for once!

How would they select an audience for these hustings?

The audience is extremely carefully selected and screened to ensure an absolute balance of the Islington SWP ....

Good morning, everyone.

Interesting piece, Mr. Pedley.

OT, but caught sight of these Witcher 3 prints. They're pricey (basic versions are typically £70-115 and there are enswankified versions for circa £300-400) but as numbers are limited, there are some gamers here and most people have a bit more cash than most [well, me] I thought I'd flag them up:
https://www.candb.com/en/artcollectivegallery/94/artwork-by-cd-projekt-red.html

foxinsoxuk said:

SquareRoot said:

foxinsoxuk said:

david_herdson said:

ToryJim said:

david_herdson said:

Jonathan said:

Are the Tories right wing these days?

If you believe the Labour candidates and their supporters, it's the 'most right wing' Tory government ever. But then it always is.

I bet we are doing our semi annual privatisation of the NHS too

Yes. Considering that the Conservatives have run the NHS for 41 of its 68 years, we must be staggeringly incompetent not to have privatised it yet. That or we just don't want to do it.

On the other hand that does mean that the Tories (and surely 5 of those years were Coalition?) Have to take ownership of a lot of the problems within the NHS.

PF2 is being touted as the new solution, and to be fair it is better than PF1. In Leicester we are expecting to build our new ambulatory care hospital and childrens hospital with it:

http://www.buildingbetterhealthcare.co.uk/news/article_page/Will_PF2_give_health_sector_schemes_a_shot_in_the_arm/91738

Any idea of borrowing even more money to finance the NHS should be stamped on from a great height. We will be paying for Browns lunacies of private financing long after I am dead.

This is current govt policy and does seem in line with May's One Nation Tory approach rather than SeanT's drunken babyeating rants.

With interest rates as low as they are there has never been a cheaper time for borrowing, and genuine infrastructure is truly investment rather than spending.

Think of it as a forward payment on the £350 million per week to spend on the NHS from the Brexit if that makes you more comfortable.

It doesn't matter how low interest rates are - at some point you have to repay the capital and thus reduce consumption in that particular future year.

MattW said:

rcs1000 said:

david_herdson said:

ToryJim said:

david_herdson said:

Jonathan said:

Are the Tories right wing these days?

If you believe the Labour candidates and their supporters, it's the 'most right wing' Tory government ever. But then it always is.

I bet we are doing our semi annual privatisation of the NHS too

Yes. Considering that the Conservatives have run the NHS for 41 of its 68 years, we must be staggeringly incompetent not to have privatised it yet. That or we just don't want to do it.

Or you have a really, really cunning plan.

If they have a 15 year run, dismantling of the NHS (and the welfare state system) for a more European style system would be one thing worth very serious consideration.

Personally I don't think Theresa May has the balls for that, though.

That might be one of the ways to give Labour a chance. There were two effective pitches in the Brexit campaign. One was immigration, the second was spending more on the NHS. It was even on the side of the campaign buses.

Worth noting that those aged 65+ (heavily Tory voting) are the biggest users of the NHS. It could be as self defeating as the Labour party ignoring its core vote.

SouthamObserver said:

The key is that this is a poll of Labour members. Smith is pitching to them, not the electorate. With him in charge Labour could hope to emulate EdM's score last year and perhaps do better in Wales. If the LDs progress slightly, that could mean a hung Parliament. It is the very best Labour could hope for. Under Corbyn, of course, that is impossible. More important, though, is that if Smith wins Labour becomes a party focused on winning elections once again. That is absolutely vital.

However, Smith is not going to win. Corbyn is. So it's all academic. Labour will lose the next GE massively. That's the way the hard left will be defeated.

Yes, that is Labour's choice, under Smith they might match Ed Miliband's score on a good day, with Corbyn in charge they would be trying to avoid doing even worse than Foot did in 1983

MattW said:

rcs1000 said:

david_herdson said:

ToryJim said:

david_herdson said:

Jonathan said:

Are the Tories right wing these days?

If you believe the Labour candidates and their supporters, it's the 'most right wing' Tory government ever. But then it always is.

I bet we are doing our semi annual privatisation of the NHS too

Yes. Considering that the Conservatives have run the NHS for 41 of its 68 years, we must be staggeringly incompetent not to have privatised it yet. That or we just don't want to do it.

Or you have a really, really cunning plan.

If they have a 15 year run, dismantling of the NHS (and the welfare state system) for a more European style system would be one thing worth very serious consideration.

Personally I don't think Theresa May has the balls for that, though.

May would do neither but personally I think requiring the wealthy to take out private health insurance would be sensible, which is what they do in Australia, as would be a more contributory welfare state

SquareRoot said:

No_Offence_Alan said:

foxinsoxuk said:

SquareRoot said:

foxinsoxuk said:

david_herdson said:

ToryJim said:

david_herdson said:

Jonathan said:

Are the Tories right wing these days?

If you believe the Labour candidates and their supporters, it's the 'most right wing' Tory government ever. But then it always is.

I bet we are doing our semi annual privatisation of the NHS too

Yes. Considering that the Conservatives have run the NHS for 41 of its 68 years, we must be staggeringly incompetent not to have privatised it yet. That or we just don't want to do it.

On the other hand that does mean that the Tories (and surely 5 of those years were Coalition?) Have to take ownership of a lot of the problems within the NHS.

PF2 is being touted as the new solution, and to be fair it is better than PF1. In Leicester we are expecting to build our new ambulatory care hospital and childrens hospital with it:

http://www.buildingbetterhealthcare.co.uk/news/article_page/Will_PF2_give_health_sector_schemes_a_shot_in_the_arm/91738

Any idea of borrowing even more money to finance the NHS should be stamped on from a great height. We will be paying for Browns lunacies of private financing long after I am dead.

This is current govt policy and does seem in line with May's One Nation Tory approach rather than SeanT's drunken babyeating rants.

With interest rates as low as they are there has never been a cheaper time for borrowing, and genuine infrastructure is truly investment rather than spending.

Think of it as a forward payment on the £350 million per week to spend on the NHS from the Brexit if that makes you more comfortable.

It doesn't matter how low interest rates are - at some point you have to repay the capital and thus reduce consumption in that particular future year.

Quite so. George Osborne was right to focus on running a surplus asap.

He went a funny way about it!

david_herdson said:

tpfkar said:

I feel quite sorry for Owen Smith - after weeks of dithering from the MPs, he's the only one (A Eagle aside) to have shown the slightest bit of spine when bigger beasts should have stepped up. He's doing his best with what's become a tribal mob, and given that he's supposed to have 170 MPs behind him, most seem to have gone AWOL. Seems like a decent bloke and as bemused as everyone outside Labour at the cult of Corbyn.

Either way, the road seems long and painful for Labour from here.

This nails the essence of the problem (or half of it). Smith is not a potential PM; his appeal is not that he will lead Labour into government (yes, he's saying that but he has to given his position); it's that he'll arrest the decline. But is that really enough? Perhaps he would resign later if elected and allow himself to be a super-stalking-horse, so that a genuinely PM-able candidate could be chosen. Such self-sacrifice is not usually a characteristic of the kind of people who become party leaders though.

And the potential PMs within Labour ranks didn't stand because they knew they'd lose again. For as long as Labour won't choose someone that the country would choose, they are in a very deep hole.

Smith would be Labour's Michael Howard, neither electable as PM in a typical election year but both at least able to do the job of opposition leader unlike their predecessor. Howard only won 198 seats in 2005 and 32% but IDS may have done even worse

Rather like the logo at the end of the video clip "Leadership Election 2016.....choose Labours next Prime Minister"

I looked very very closely but TBH I couldn't see any pregnant ladies in the room.

williamglenn said:

Tissue_Price said:

ThreeQuidder said:

The trouble with this result

https://twitter.com/britainelects/status/761327761235378177

Very close for second. I wonder if any enterprising local journo will go with "Mainstream parties split Beaver opposition to UKIP"?

"Beaver breaks with conformity and goes purple"

UKIP come through the middle in Beaver?

Moses_ said:

Rather like the logo at the end of the video clip "Leadership Election 2016.....choose Labours next Prime Minister"

I looked very very closely but TBH I couldn't see any pregnant ladies in the room.

Labour will never form a government again. (I may have said this before.)

Luckyguy1983 said:

williamglenn said:

Tissue_Price said:

ThreeQuidder said:

The trouble with this result

https://twitter.com/britainelects/status/761327761235378177

Very close for second. I wonder if any enterprising local journo will go with "Mainstream parties split Beaver opposition to UKIP"?

"Beaver breaks with conformity and goes purple"

UKIP come through the middle in Beaver?

Kipper in Beaver?

So Shami, who authored an "independent" report into anti semitism widely criticised for being a whitewash whilst being a Labour member gets awarded a peerage ....

This is the new politics is it?

Same as the old politics but with extra spite and incompetence

Jonathan said:

david_herdson said:

tpfkar said:

I feel quite sorry for Owen Smith - after weeks of dithering from the MPs, he's the only one (A Eagle aside) to have shown the slightest bit of spine when bigger beasts should have stepped up. He's doing his best with what's become a tribal mob, and given that he's supposed to have 170 MPs behind him, most seem to have gone AWOL. Seems like a decent bloke and as bemused as everyone outside Labour at the cult of Corbyn.

Either way, the road seems long and painful for Labour from here.

This nails the essence of the problem (or half of it). Smith is not a potential PM; his appeal is not that he will lead Labour into government (yes, he's saying that but he has to given his position); it's that he'll arrest the decline. But is that really enough? Perhaps he would resign later if elected and allow himself to be a super-stalking-horse, so that a genuinely PM-able candidate could be chosen. Such self-sacrifice is not usually a characteristic of the kind of people who become party leaders though.

And the potential PMs within Labour ranks didn't stand because they knew they'd lose again. For as long as Labour won't choose someone that the country would choose, they are in a very deep hole.

Disagree. Smith has potential as PM. This is early days for him. IMO he is better than Ed.

A low bar.... mind you this is a man who got where he is through connections and who once famously rang 999 to get comments from the police.

Some parties do ave em.........

Morris_Dancer said:

Mr. glw, he's right. Corbyn as Labour leader does appeal to Conservatives, just not in the way that chap seemed to think.

Best Labour leader ever.

Jonathan said:

david_herdson said:

tpfkar said:

I feel quite sorry for Owen Smith - after weeks of dithering from the MPs, he's the only one (A Eagle aside) to have shown the slightest bit of spine when bigger beasts should have stepped up. He's doing his best with what's become a tribal mob, and given that he's supposed to have 170 MPs behind him, most seem to have gone AWOL. Seems like a decent bloke and as bemused as everyone outside Labour at the cult of Corbyn.

Either way, the road seems long and painful for Labour from here.

This nails the essence of the problem (or half of it). Smith is not a potential PM; his appeal is not that he will lead Labour into government (yes, he's saying that but he has to given his position); it's that he'll arrest the decline. But is that really enough? Perhaps he would resign later if elected and allow himself to be a super-stalking-horse, so that a genuinely PM-able candidate could be chosen. Such self-sacrifice is not usually a characteristic of the kind of people who become party leaders though.

And the potential PMs within Labour ranks didn't stand because they knew they'd lose again. For as long as Labour won't choose someone that the country would choose, they are in a very deep hole.

Disagree. Smith has potential as PM. This is early days for him. IMO he is better than Ed.

He was worse than corbyn last night. He was truly terrible.

FrancisUrquhart said:

Jonathan said:

david_herdson said:

tpfkar said:

I feel quite sorry for Owen Smith - after weeks of dithering from the MPs, he's the only one (A Eagle aside) to have shown the slightest bit of spine when bigger beasts should have stepped up. He's doing his best with what's become a tribal mob, and given that he's supposed to have 170 MPs behind him, most seem to have gone AWOL. Seems like a decent bloke and as bemused as everyone outside Labour at the cult of Corbyn.

Either way, the road seems long and painful for Labour from here.

This nails the essence of the problem (or half of it). Smith is not a potential PM; his appeal is not that he will lead Labour into government (yes, he's saying that but he has to given his position); it's that he'll arrest the decline. But is that really enough? Perhaps he would resign later if elected and allow himself to be a super-stalking-horse, so that a genuinely PM-able candidate could be chosen. Such self-sacrifice is not usually a characteristic of the kind of people who become party leaders though.

And the potential PMs within Labour ranks didn't stand because they knew they'd lose again. For as long as Labour won't choose someone that the country would choose, they are in a very deep hole.

Disagree. Smith has potential as PM. This is early days for him. IMO he is better than Ed.

He was worse than corbyn last night. He was truly terrible.

Disagree, whilst the debate was awful, he was good. Deserves respect for being the only one standing up to the braying mob.

SouthamObserver said:

The key is that this is a poll of Labour members. Smith is pitching to them, not the electorate. With him in charge Labour could hope to emulate EdM's score last year and perhaps do better in Wales. If the LDs progress slightly, that could mean a hung Parliament. It is the very best Labour could hope for. Under Corbyn, of course, that is impossible. More important, though, is that if Smith wins Labour becomes a party focused on winning elections once again. That is absolutely vital.

However, Smith is not going to win. Corbyn is. So it's all academic. Labour will lose the next GE massively. That's the way the hard left will be defeated.

I agree 2020 is lost a divided party will never win but blame for that has been handed to the left on a plate by the PLP.

The left get 2 goes to win IMO 2020/2025.


The 2nd once the new PLP more united after deselections is Labours only chance.

A new new Labour has zero chance of winning with its potential voters anyway IMO

Jonathan said:

Disagree, whilst the debate was awful, he was good. Deserves respect for being the only one standing up to the braying mob.

Eddie the Eagle deserved respect for competing in the 1988 Winter Olympics.

bigjohnowls said:

SouthamObserver said:

The key is that this is a poll of Labour members. Smith is pitching to them, not the electorate. With him in charge Labour could hope to emulate EdM's score last year and perhaps do better in Wales. If the LDs progress slightly, that could mean a hung Parliament. It is the very best Labour could hope for. Under Corbyn, of course, that is impossible. More important, though, is that if Smith wins Labour becomes a party focused on winning elections once again. That is absolutely vital.

However, Smith is not going to win. Corbyn is. So it's all academic. Labour will lose the next GE massively. That's the way the hard left will be defeated.

I agree 2020 is lost a divided party will never win but blame for that has been handed to the left on a plate by the PLP.

The left get 2 goes to win IMO 2020/2025.


The 2nd once the new PLP more united after deselections is Labours only chance.

A new new Labour has zero chance of winning with its potential voters anyway IMO

Bizarre logic. Corbyn can't carry his own party. He's not going to carry the country.

Once he's deselected the MPs to put his Yes men in place, what next? He will try to deselect the electorate?

perdix said:

MaxPB said:

It's amazing how incompetent Corbyn is. Right now the Tories could be having a massive problem with sleaze and cash for honours, but by putting forwards Chakrabati for a peerage he has completely undermined the argument and now it is just another case of "a pox on all your houses". Owen Smith has an opportunity here to show Jez up as a huge hypocrite and win over a lot of people. He must take the chance and attack this appointment.

Please enumerate the Tories' "sleaze and cash for honours".

They mean the perfectly ordinary set of honours for friends and allies of political persons (more so than usual if only because of the reason for the set of honours being more an explicitly political occasion than usual).

The Tories do not have a massive problem with sleaze and cash for honours right now. If now signifies such, we already had that problem as part of the system.

MaxPB said:

Jonathan said:

FrancisUrquhart said:

Jonathan said:

david_herdson said:

tpfkar said:

I feel quite sorry for Owen Smith - after weeks of dithering from the MPs, he's the only one (A Eagle aside) to have shown the slightest bit of spine when bigger beasts should have stepped up. He's doing his best with what's become a tribal mob, and given that he's supposed to have 170 MPs behind him, most seem to have gone AWOL. Seems like a decent bloke and as bemused as everyone outside Labour at the cult of Corbyn.

Either way, the road seems long and painful for Labour from here.

This nails the essence of the problem (or half of it). Smith is not a potential PM; his appeal is not that he will lead Labour into government (yes, he's saying that but he has to given his position); it's that he'll arrest the decline. But is that really enough? Perhaps he would resign later if elected and allow himself to be a super-stalking-horse, so that a genuinely PM-able candidate could be chosen. Such self-sacrifice is not usually a characteristic of the kind of people who become party leaders though.

And the potential PMs within Labour ranks didn't stand because they knew they'd lose again. For as long as Labour won't choose someone that the country would choose, they are in a very deep hole.

Disagree. Smith has potential as PM. This is early days for him. IMO he is better than Ed.

He was worse than corbyn last night. He was truly terrible.

Disagree, whilst the debate was awful, he was good. Deserves respect for being the only one standing up to the braying mob.

Agreed. A debate to become Labour leader isn't going to be the same as a debate to become PM. I don't think he'd be very good, compares unfavourably to Ed, but he is an improvement on Corbyn. Hopefully Smith is just a way to remove Corbyn and he stands down next summer and opens up the race proper, with no hard left candidate being given the nominations. Unfortunately he has to win first, and at this point in time it seems unlikely.

If Smith wins he will have a mandate from members and not stand down after all Howard replaced IDS and fought an election with little chance of being PM

bigjohnowls said:

Jonathan said:

bigjohnowls said:

SouthamObserver said:

The key is that this is a poll of Labour members. Smith is pitching to them, not the electorate. With him in charge Labour could hope to emulate EdM's score last year and perhaps do better in Wales. If the LDs progress slightly, that could mean a hung Parliament. It is the very best Labour could hope for. Under Corbyn, of course, that is impossible. More important, though, is that if Smith wins Labour becomes a party focused on winning elections once again. That is absolutely vital.

However, Smith is not going to win. Corbyn is. So it's all academic. Labour will lose the next GE massively. That's the way the hard left will be defeated.

I agree 2020 is lost a divided party will never win but blame for that has been handed to the left on a plate by the PLP.

The left get 2 goes to win IMO 2020/2025.


The 2nd once the new PLP more united after deselections is Labours only chance.

A new new Labour has zero chance of winning with its potential voters anyway IMO

Bizarre logic. Corbyn can't carry his own party. He's not going to carry the country.

Once he's deselected the MPs to put his Yes men in place, what next? He will try to deselect the electorate?

No a radical manifesto will attract more voters once labour has a PLP that gets behind one.

The current crop see a Tory win as preferable to a Corbyn win as per SO and maybe you?

I seriously doubt the first sentence is true. Especially in the face of cold, hard pragmatism from May and the Conservatives.

kle4 said:

perdix said:

MaxPB said:

It's amazing how incompetent Corbyn is. Right now the Tories could be having a massive problem with sleaze and cash for honours, but by putting forwards Chakrabati for a peerage he has completely undermined the argument and now it is just another case of "a pox on all your houses". Owen Smith has an opportunity here to show Jez up as a huge hypocrite and win over a lot of people. He must take the chance and attack this appointment.

Please enumerate the Tories' "sleaze and cash for honours".

They mean the perfectly ordinary set of honours for friends and allies of political persons (more so than usual if only because of the reason for the set of honours being more an explicitly political occasion than usual).

The Tories do not have a massive problem with sleaze and cash for honours right now. If now signifies such, we already had that problem as part of the system.

Surely that was the point? That Corbyn and Labour ought to be attacking the Conservatives over the honours list but instead it is left to the right-wing press.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3724567/Dave-s-two-fingers-voters-brazen-contempt-public-opinion-Cameron-showers-honours-chums-cronies-second-raters.html

bigjohnowls said:

I agree 2020 is lost a divided party will never win but blame for that has been handed to the left on a plate by the PLP.

Yep - here is the reason the PLP actions have been so foolhardy.

A loss in 2020 can now be put down to division, rather than Corbyn being too left wing.

The coup was a poor move, they should have held their powder for Corbyn to actually screw up - in a real election.

@Indigo

john_zims

Or are you saying that Smith is pretending to be far left ?


http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1522032/No-welcome-in-these-valleys-for-Labour.html

Owen Smith, the new Labour candidate, is, as his name might suggest, male, and a son of the valleys. But the boyo bit ends there.
A former BBC journalist, he was a special adviser to former Welsh Secretary Paul Murphy and is now a political lobbyist for American pharmaceutical giant Pfizer. About as New Labour as you can get.
Would he describe himself as a socialist?
"I am a democratic socialist, yes."
And Mr Blair, is he a socialist?
"Yes."
Mr Smith, 36, believes the Law movement is no more than a political spasm. "Their campaign is about the past and reminding people about the past. We are looking to the future." Trying not to sound like a New Labour clone, Mr Smith dips his toe in a puddle of controversy. "The invasion of Iraq was a mistake," he offers. "The world would have been a safer place if we hadn't done it."
Any other areas of difference with Mr Blair?
"No, I don't think so."


Thanks for the confirmation,so he's a Blairite pretending to be a left wing nutjob,how sad is that.

david_herdson said:

Jonathan said:

david_herdson said:

tpfkar said:

I feel quite sorry for Owen Smith - after weeks of dithering from the MPs, he's the only one (A Eagle aside) to have shown the slightest bit of spine when bigger beasts should have stepped up. He's doing his best with what's become a tribal mob, and given that he's supposed to have 170 MPs behind him, most seem to have gone AWOL. Seems like a decent bloke and as bemused as everyone outside Labour at the cult of Corbyn.

Either way, the road seems long and painful for Labour from here.

This nails the essence of the problem (or half of it). Smith is not a potential PM; his appeal is not that he will lead Labour into government (yes, he's saying that but he has to given his position); it's that he'll arrest the decline. But is that really enough? Perhaps he would resign later if elected and allow himself to be a super-stalking-horse, so that a genuinely PM-able candidate could be chosen. Such self-sacrifice is not usually a characteristic of the kind of people who become party leaders though.

And the potential PMs within Labour ranks didn't stand because they knew they'd lose again. For as long as Labour won't choose someone that the country would choose, they are in a very deep hole.

Disagree. Smith has potential as PM. This is early days for him. IMO he is better than Ed.

No, but he might have potential as a Leader of the Opposition, which would be a step in the right direction. His magic money tree policies alone will make him unelectable.

Unsure re the comparison with Ed - though of course the country decisively rejected him.

Don't think we know anything about the policies Smith would go to the country with. In 2005 Cameron was pledged to match Labour spending. It's too early and too hypothetical.

I will say that Labour should be aiming for a more left wing platform than Blair circa 2006. Blair circa 1997 is quite radical.

Luckyguy1983 said:

williamglenn said:

Tissue_Price said:

ThreeQuidder said:

The trouble with this result

https://twitter.com/britainelects/status/761327761235378177

Very close for second. I wonder if any enterprising local journo will go with "Mainstream parties split Beaver opposition to UKIP"?

"Beaver breaks with conformity and goes purple"

UKIP come through the middle in Beaver?

felix said:

john_zims said:

@Indigo

john_zims

Or are you saying that Smith is pretending to be far left ?


http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1522032/No-welcome-in-these-valleys-for-Labour.html

Owen Smith, the new Labour candidate, is, as his name might suggest, male, and a son of the valleys. But the boyo bit ends there.
A former BBC journalist, he was a special adviser to former Welsh Secretary Paul Murphy and is now a political lobbyist for American pharmaceutical giant Pfizer. About as New Labour as you can get.
Would he describe himself as a socialist?
"I am a democratic socialist, yes."
And Mr Blair, is he a socialist?
"Yes."
Mr Smith, 36, believes the Law movement is no more than a political spasm. "Their campaign is about the past and reminding people about the past. We are looking to the future." Trying not to sound like a New Labour clone, Mr Smith dips his toe in a puddle of controversy. "The invasion of Iraq was a mistake," he offers. "The world would have been a safer place if we hadn't done it."
Any other areas of difference with Mr Blair?
"No, I don't think so."


Thanks for the confirmation,so he's a Blairite pretending to be a left wing nutjob,how sad is that.

The fact that 'blairite' is a term of abuse sums up the problems in the Labour party. I detest the man but he was a winner.

Isn't it a massive failure for Blair's legacy that to be even associated with his name is a total negative? To reverse your point, for many ex Labour voters (including me), he was a winner but I detest the man and his policies.

Rio mugger shot dead with own gun by 'Russian diplomat' close to Olympic torch relay

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/olympics/2016/08/05/rio-mugger-shot-dead-by-russian-diplomat-with-own-gun-close-to-o/

Hmmm.....They appeared to have picked on the wrong "diplomat" there...

David_Evershed said:

Luckyguy1983 said:

williamglenn said:

Tissue_Price said:

ThreeQuidder said:

The trouble with this result

https://twitter.com/britainelects/status/761327761235378177

Very close for second. I wonder if any enterprising local journo will go with "Mainstream parties split Beaver opposition to UKIP"?

"Beaver breaks with conformity and goes purple"

UKIP come through the middle in Beaver?

... and lose their seat here:
Silverdale & Parksite (Newcastle under Lyme) result:
LAB: 56.4% (+19.5)
UKIP: 24.6% (-21.2)
CON: 11.3% (-0.4)
IND: 7.6% (+7.6)

Also down 13% in South East Holderness, Yorkshire.

DecrepitJohnL said:

kle4 said:

perdix said:

MaxPB said:

It's amazing how incompetent Corbyn is. Right now the Tories could be having a massive problem with sleaze and cash for honours, but by putting forwards Chakrabati for a peerage he has completely undermined the argument and now it is just another case of "a pox on all your houses". Owen Smith has an opportunity here to show Jez up as a huge hypocrite and win over a lot of people. He must take the chance and attack this appointment.

Please enumerate the Tories' "sleaze and cash for honours".

They mean the perfectly ordinary set of honours for friends and allies of political persons (more so than usual if only because of the reason for the set of honours being more an explicitly political occasion than usual).

The Tories do not have a massive problem with sleaze and cash for honours right now. If now signifies such, we already had that problem as part of the system.

Surely that was the point? That Corbyn and Labour ought to be attacking the Conservatives over the honours list but instead it is left to the right-wing press.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3724567/Dave-s-two-fingers-voters-brazen-contempt-public-opinion-Cameron-showers-honours-chums-cronies-second-raters.html

My point is there's not as much to be gained attacking the Tories over things as people are pretending, because it was so ordinary. Sure, without Chakribarti they could attack the whole concept of the honours system, I would guess Corbyn is not a fan of it, but despite the fevered dreams of someon left and right, I don't see why this set of appointments would make for a particularly telling attack on the Tories, due to how unexceptional it is.