Interesting graphic showing public perceptions of the various leaders on the left/right spectrum over the years:
next labour leader
- Thread starter sun_tzu
- Start date
That first post is absolutely superb. It's also a lot more powerful when it comes from someone who's really feeling the full brunt of austerity, and its effects. I also found the post saying that Labour might be in power if they put in as much effort defeating the Tories as they have trying to defeat Corbyn to be quite apt.
It's also laughably wrong and an affront to the effort put in by volunteers and MPs over the last five years, actually doing the campaigning against austerity (in every vote in parliament, as requested in the post) and then still losing, meaning more austerity. The message was wrong, not the effort put into giving it.
To be fair, it's hardly a brush that's being tarnished upon all Labour MP's and campaigners. I'm fully aware that there are an endless number out there who worked tiresomely during the run-up to the election, who put a lot into it, and would've been gutted when it didn't go their way. I'm not doubting that at all.
But there is undoubtedly a section of the party, seemingly more in the upper echelons, who seem ridiculously opposed to Corbyn winning the leadership election. From what I've heard, Cooper and Kendall have said they might not even serve in his cabinet should he be elected, for example.
I'm not trying to assert that a lack of effort was a general thing across the parties, since I know that the party would've had plenty of MP's and volunteers who were really committed to the cause.
Expect Burnham to win. If not him, Cooper. I think too many people have come out and slated Corbyn, since the poll that had him leading, for his support not to wane considerably.
I think it's fair enough for them both to say that, I doubt Corbyn would've much wanted to be in a Blair cabinet delivering his policies. They're opposed to him being elected because it's not out of the realms of possibility it would actually kill the Labour party electorally for the foreseeable future. It's not borne out of a hate of leftwing ideas, it's an evidence based theory that being so far to the left makes you unelectable in Westminster elections, which is good neither for the party nor the people that need a Labour government. Wasn't directing any anger at you there by the way, was just a general rant
I think it's fair enough for them both to say that, I doubt Corbyn would've much wanted to be in a Blair cabinet delivering his policies. They're opposed to him being elected because it's not out of the realms of possibility it would actually kill the Labour party electorally for the foreseeable future. It's not borne out of a hate of leftwing ideas, it's an evidence based theory that being so far to the left makes you unelectable in Westminster elections, which is good neither for the party nor the people that need a Labour government. Wasn't directing any anger at you there by the way, was just a general rant
While you've got a point, I think the problem is that a party who is solely focused upon doing what's best for them electorally can end up being one which becomes completely lost as to what they actually stand for, or what they're actually trying to do.
Honestly, I really don't think any of the current bunch are particularly electable. Kendall's only going to alienate the socialist/left-wing segment, I think Cooper's fairly bland and unlikely to change much, while Burnham's largely the same. The unwillingness of them to stand against the further austerity lately kind of highlights this. They don't really seem to know what they stand for, and while you're always going to have some element of politicking, if you constantly just do what makes you most electable, then as I say, you stand for anything, and people grow tired of that.
You could argue that the Tories are sort of similar in their approach sometimes, but they're much better at the PR aspect of their party than Labour have been in recent years.
Labour need to take strong, solid set of principles which they can move forward with, instead of just fluctuating every time it seems electorally convenient.
One of my friends works for a division (Nursing related) in the NHS who have to find £60m to cut from their budget in the next two years. He says they don't have a clue how to do it, and that the £16m of 'savings' they've found so far have already made the service significantly worse. The argument against austerity is so simple, and backed by so much economic knowledge that it's infuriating to see so many in the Labour party not attempt to make it. The Tories are altering the scope and size of the state for a generation, if it's only Corbyn who looks like he'll provide a counter-argument to this I don't see who else is worth voting for.
Also mostly agree with your assessments of the candidates from that last post. Shame that Cooper's not more charismatic, as I think she'd make a good leader.
But Corbyn is unelectable?! His leadership of the Labour party is completely redundant and will give the Tories free reign over the country. I just don't understand why his supporters don't grasp that.
None of this current bunch are particularly electable. Does anyone believe that any of the four candidates have a good chance at ousting the Tories, provided they don't implode?
Politics should, to a certain extent, be about following your own convictions and beliefs. If people merely constantly go for whatever is most electable then you end up losing any sort of purpose which that party may have had.
Do you think Cooper, Burnham or Kendall are electable? Will they energise the base? Will they change the political debate in the UK for the next decade? Will they improve relations with the lost SNP, Green and UKIP voters?
But I bet that you will lament the fate of the 'hardest hit in society' (not you I bet) but you feel that giving the Tories a lock in and not being able to affect change in anyway is important because of 'convictions and beliefs'. Maybe there is something wrong with your convictions and beliefs. Idealists are black and white thinkers, the world isn't black and white unfortunately.
Kendall can bring the party into the conversation at least. Union led left wing Labour is the politics of the past I'm afraid. The core of electorate believe in business and aspiration. I am not interested in debating if that is right or wrong because it is the state of play in 21st century Britain. If you want to affect change then you have to play the game.
The Green Party is for people who just want to fart in the wind.
The center changes, political paradigms are fluid. Compare the perceived political centre ground today to 2005, 1985, 1965, 1945, and 1925. Corbyn winning the leadership would bring many ideas, causes and topics of conversation back into British Politics, we can't say for certain what will happen to them from there.
And in any case, read the policies he's coming out with so far. They're nowhere near as radical as you've been lead to believe.
That is a truly cheap jibe. Maybe the rest of us should just shut up when we see worse-off people struggling?
Someone like Kendall getting elected would be the final death knell for the party. For starters they'd lose all progressives who will flock to the fringe centre-left parties, whereas those with Tory leanings would just vote Tory instead of Tory lite. Not to mention she believes and stands for absolutely nothing. The absolute epitome of a pointless, wretched career politician.
She's consistently bottom of the polls and constituency votes so far. Don't worry, people see that.
Apparently Corbyn is so unelectable that he's going to be an elected leader.
Yeah, but it worries me how vehement and nasty the attacks have been towards Corbyn. This time its not just from the usual right wing media, but from elements of his own party. We've already had the odious Mr Blair being wheeled out to offer his doom-mongering nonsense and then you have the other 3 candidates taking it in turns to vilify Corbyn with their hysterics. It'll only get worse leading up to the election.
The politics of fear worked in discrediting Miliband, I fear it might work again in discrediting Corbyn.
They. are. worried.
So a female Blair... Who in fairness to him somewhat smashed it out of the park electorally
Though she has little charisma and nowhere close to the aurotry skills of Blair.
But winning elections from the centre is a proven method... Especially is the tories drift off to the right in a eurosceptic rush into UKIP ground.
As I say I'm not sure she has the personality to pull it off but as the libs are decimated and the tories moving away from the centre ground it does seem the obvious place for Labour to claim.
I forsee another Michael foot style hammering with corbyn but if they are going to go left they might as well go the whole hogg rather than burnham or Mrs ed balls
I'm not seeing the Michael Foot and Neil Kinnock parallels. Its 2015 not the 80s/90s, the world has since shifted away from the left-right dichotomy of cold war politics, which back then had worked in favour of the right since they could always beat their opponents with the stigmatic commie/socialist/red brush. In Europe we're seeing a host of left-wing parties gaining ground and being elected and in the US a self-proclaimed socialist is also giving Hillary Clinton a considerable headache in democrat candidate nominations.
As already mentioned, if people listened to Corbyn's ideas then they'd quickly see they're not as radical as the doom-mongerers depict them to be. This whole myth of Labour having to shift to the center is exactly that - a myth. For starters there's no 'center' for them left to move into, and if someone like Cooper or god forbid Kendall were to be elected, then they'd just become another centre-right party largely indistinguishable from the Tories. That's not going to help them win an election.
That isn't what I meant at all. The point is what is the point in taking a position that doesn't help them in anyway, forgetting what you are tangibly fighting for in favour of you own philosophical ideology?
Worried about what exactly? Do you really believe that a Union led left wing Labour party are going to get in power and change this country?
Last edited:
I'm not claiming to be a complete idealist, as such, though. I expect that if Corbyn gets elected, he'll have to make certain concessions and that he'd be wise to do so. It's more the fact that, while you've got to try and be electable as a party, if this becomes all you focus on then you lose sight of what you're actually aiming to implement once you are elected.
Not to mention that the state of play in politics can easily change over time. It's not going to remain exactly as it is now for eternity. Ideals and politicians will come and go. Corbyn may not be electable as such, but none of this lot really are. They're a bunch of people who constantly change their minds depending on what they see as most likely to get them into power, and it shows.
I don't like the Tories, but they're at least quite capable in making moves which are quite clearly for their own political gain, while covering them up as wise, sensible policies. Osbourne's plans to enshrine not running a deficit for any government in law was an example: it was slated by economists, but it was something that potentially sounded quite appealing.
This Labour bunch are completely incapable of that, though. Harman's attempts to defend their position on not opposing further austerity is a bit of a joke. She says that they need to listen to the national conversation, since people didn't want Labour, but she ignores why people didn't want Labour. They're perceived as a weak, unclear party whose views aren't particularly set in stone, and who don't really have a clue what they believe. Say what you want about Corbyn, but he seems to have some sense of conviction, and a set political stance. I doubt it's going to win him an election, but none of this Labour lot particularly have a chance unless George Osbourne and Boris Johnson begin setting puppies on fire.
For what it's worth, I'm not even a Labour voter. I voted SNP in May, and there are elements of the Labour party I really don't like. Hell, I wouldn't even say I'm a massive fan of unions or anything. I just don't see why a leader who wants to firmly oppose austerity, and firmly believes in these measures, is such a ridiculous notion, especially when the other candidates he's up against are...well, all a bit boring and uninspiring. The socialist era Labour may be dead, but the Blair era Labour is too.
Major Labour benefactors are already saying that they are going to withdraw funding if he gets elected. It is the game again unfortunately, you need those guys to give you the power to make your voice heard. For me it isn't a case of what should happen in terms of policy etc, it is a case of what actually can happen. Under Corbyn the party will split and major players will leave the party along with major benefactors. The Union led left wing Labour party will become nothing more than an insignificant protest party affecting no change whilst the Tories screw the country into the ground, in my opinion.
Do you have a source for that?
http://www.theguardian.com/politics...could-cause-sdp-style-labour-split-says-donor
It is more speculative and threatening in fairness.
Main story on The Guardian site.
Which would be an utter joke if they did so, since they'd be undermining all of those who would've determined that they want Corbyn as their leader.
I am not saying that it is right, but this is politics. Again it is ideology vs pragmatism. The pragmatists invariably win.
You keep going back to this argument, but it doesn't apply in the long term. How pragmatic was Nick Clegg?
Elections are won with competency, trust, and clear messages that people want to hear. The Labour party has none of those at the moment, and no level of pragmatism from Kendall, Cooper or Burnham are going to change that, or the current narrative.
Just a gut feeling, and I'm nowhere near as up to date as some of you lot on here, but I'm not sure Corbyn really expected this rise in support. Does he really want to be Prime Minister in 2020? Is there any risk of him pulling out?
When I say pragmatism I mean the sense to know what is saleable policy in a given climate. You might be right on all the other contenders but Corbyn will divide the party and relegate it into insignificance IMO. His policy on university tuition, for example, do you really think the electorate at large are going to be happy to fund university education again?
Apparently a large number of the influx of new members after the election were in the 18-25 age range, with 18 being the most common age, there is a lot of support for him from that end.
Last edited:
Nowhere does it say that major benefactors are threatening to pull out. It's just one guy saying 'I think it could maybe happen'.
It is a thinly veiled threat. He is one of the biggest Labour donors and will keep company with the others, it is a little misleading to label him as 'just one guy'. It is an attempt to influence the voting no doubt.
To an extent. But Labour donors surely aren't idiots - pulling out if Corbyn gets in will be disastrous because it'll only serve to highlight the split within the Labour party, and alienate a number of voters. Like TH said, in the case of someone like Clegg sometimes pragmatism can end up being disastrous.
I tend to think that Clegg was more poisoned by being too verbose before he got into bed with the Tories when really the Lib Dems had very little power in that arrangement. He reneged on his key policy (tuition fees) because he had no power to do anything about it, he wasn't pragmatic in that regard at all.
I don't think the donors will see it like that, we are talking big business players and it will be a case of not throwing millions in the bin.
Maybe I am too cynical.
He was trying to be though, in that he wanted to be seen as someone who was moderating the Tories, but it ended up backfiring on him entirely.
With Labour, I honestly do think there's going to be a split at some point, and it's probably for the better. It's become clear in this debate that Corbyn and his mold just have a completely different political outlook to the rest of the Labour candidates. Every party will have differences in views, but Labour feels ridiculously fragmented in that it's basically made up of centre-leaning politicians and some more left-leaning socialists.
Perhaps you are right on that point but there is the SWP out there as well.
Labour as the second largest party evolved with political trends Europe wide, which generally is now centre politics. Only one Scandinavian country doesn't have a conservative government at the moment I believe, so the move to the right is something that is playing out Europe wide as well and all this in face of a global financial crisis. I do believe that a great deal of people believe in business and aspiration these days and that Labour needs to appreciate that.
What does it take to get a serious lurch to the left, a major financial disaster that shatters the electorates belief in the money men and politicians running the show, see Greece. I don't see that happening in the UK.
You make some decent points, but a lot of that reflects what is happening out there at the moment. The political spectrum across Europe could easily be completely different within 15-20 years.
I just want the Tories out ASAP. All my thinking is geared towards what I think is best way to do that. I appreciate that others in this thread want the same but have different ideas on how to achieve that. I am not averse to Corbyn's politics in principle at all, just that I don't see them winning elections in the time frame that I feel they need to be won.
I will be voting for whoever has the best chance of keeping Corbyn out.