Topics about the Labour Party
:sunglasses: 37.7 % ❤ 2.3 % :thumbsup: 16.2 % 😯 3.8 % :grinning: 29.2 % 🧥 3.8 % 🙏 4.6 % 😟 1.5 % :cry: 0.8 %
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
#595845
youngian wrote:
Tue Jan 21, 2020 7:49 pm
Becky has an ace up her sleeve; Implementing 80s Bennite procedural reforms
Yeah, because if there's one thing the electorate think about Labour it's "they need to make it easier for people who support Corbyn to chuck out MPs".
Boiler liked this
#595852
The thing I don’t get with mandatory reselection* is how anyone could think that the best thing to have before an election (which is when, I assume, this would be triggered) is a period of stress and hard work for an MP, or to bring someone new in who has to fight for a seat almost as soon as they’ve got the nod. It’s absolutely hamstringing your chances by ensuring your runner is in the worst possible shape to contest anything.

*I mean, I get that its real intent at least in the hands of Corbyn and RLB would be to suppress criticism and dissent through fear of being ousted, and allow the placement of compliant stooges. But even so, if it’s mandatory it’s still a stupid system as it doesn’t do the most loyal of forelock tuggers any favours either.
Boiler, oboogie liked this
#595858
I suppose there is at least something grimly predictable about those Corbyn favourability numbers. But by what route does Ed Miliband end up so high up that list? Utterly bonkers.
Tubby Isaacs wrote:
Tue Jan 21, 2020 5:44 pm
Is the Labour membership 15?
A Labour member currently in their late twenties/early thirties would, in all likelihood, only have a conscious memory of Blair circa Iraq and everything that followed from that era, and not as the fresh-faced, brave young vanquisher of the Tories from '97. Which, among other things, makes me feel very bloody old indeed.
#595912
Of the 202 parliamentary seats that Labour now holds (yes, it really is that bad), just over 100 of those seats are now classed as marginal (ie with a Labour majority of less than 5000, in many cases considerably less than 5000).


Edited to clarify : if 5000 people switched from the incumbent to the nearest challenger in these seats, they would change hands. So the actual criterion defining "marginal" is a Labour majority of 9,999 or less.



Fighting off internal factional manoeuvres aimed at unseating them instead of working to make their seats safer and ensure re-election is exactly what those MPs need.

If Long Bailey is elected leader, the party really is over, I'm afraid.
Last edited by Abernathy on Thu Jan 23, 2020 12:39 am, edited 1 time in total.
mattomac, Malcolm Armsteen, Watchman and 2 others liked this
#595923
This is interesting:



Admittedly it may be skewed by what they've been shown (Only Nandy seems to be footage from an interview - the rest seem to be from hustings), but it shows what many of the members think people want is pretty wildly off base with who impresses them. Even Starmer struggled, but RLB went down like a lead balloon.
#595928
I wasn't so sure when I saw this last night. The focus group criticised Starmer as too polished, but at the same time couldn't see Nandy on the international stage, precisely because of that same working class appearance that they were praising her for.

The perfect candidate doesn't exist, and I'd have been interested to hear what they saw as priority traits in a leader.
mattomac, Arrowhead liked this
#595935
crabcakes_windermere wrote:
Wed Jan 22, 2020 2:07 pm
This is interesting:



Admittedly it may be skewed by what they've been shown (Only Nandy seems to be footage from an interview - the rest seem to be from hustings), but it shows what many of the members think people want is pretty wildly off base with who impresses them. Even Starmer struggled, but RLB went down like a lead balloon.

====================================================================================

AphexGwyn
‏ @AphexGwyn
3h3 hours ago
Replying to @Channel4News @brexit_sham


If we're going to be choosing our political leaders based on focus groups and "likeability", can we just skip to the end and have the next PM as a golden retriever in a union jack waistcoat who can bark the theme tune to "Only Fools & Horses"?



John MacGill / Iain MacGilleBhràth
‏ @JohnMacGXxxx
3h3 hours ago


So pretty much Boris Johnson then?
:lol:

Carry on, chaps.
#595940
crabcakes_windermere wrote:
Wed Jan 22, 2020 2:07 pm
This is interesting:



Admittedly it may be skewed by what they've been shown (Only Nandy seems to be footage from an interview - the rest seem to be from hustings), but it shows what many of the members think people want is pretty wildly off base with who impresses them. Even Starmer struggled, but RLB went down like a lead balloon.
That's my seat, that will make the nomination selection an interesting experience.
#595950
The Red Arrow wrote:
Wed Jan 22, 2020 2:59 pm
AphexGwyn
‏ @AphexGwyn
3h3 hours ago
Replying to @Channel4News @brexit_sham


If we're going to be choosing our political leaders based on focus groups and "likeability", can we just skip to the end and have the next PM as a golden retriever in a union jack waistcoat who can bark the theme tune to "Only Fools & Horses"?

John MacGill / Iain MacGilleBhràth
‏ @JohnMacGXxxx
3h3 hours ago


So pretty much Boris Johnson then?
:lol:

Carry on, chaps.
Thing is, it'd be nice to pretend likeability wasn't a factor but human nature is to form opinions on body language, attitude, and how you say something - not just what you say. So sure, Johnson may be a sack of scheming dog turds but he's one with charisma and charm. We'll have to see how far that takes him, but to date it has taken him to No. 10. Similarly, Starmer may not be quite as naturally charming in speeches, but he clearly has intelligence and passion. If he gets the nod we'll have to hope he can get across who he is as a person more, while helping expose Johnson's duplicity.

But when you get the non-combo of a blatant lack of ability and focus AND you come over badly, like Corbyn, Lavery and RLB etc. do to anyone outside his fanclub bubble, then the struggle isn't so much uphill as vertical. And no amount of griping at 'poor people' about what they could have got if only they'd elected someone they didn't warm to, or blaming 'centrists' for not showing unwavering loyalty in the face of hostility and ineptitude, will change things. And no amount of blaming it on a hostile media will help if you repeatedly play right into their hands, do nothing to counter bad press except chunter away under your beard about it, and also genuinely *are* a petulant, boring old git (or, as we have now, a nonsense-spouting gaffe-prone rework of the same).

You don't win anything by just being achingly worthy, except the adoration of the faithful. But of course as we all now know embellishing their own credentials was probably the top priority at the last election for some. The difficult thing is, telling a single mum whose benefits have just been cut, or a disabled man who has been told he has to find work even though he cannot leave the house, or the residents of a town whose car industry has just left that you 'won the argument' and now you want to revolutionise how they choose Labour MPs they don't want to vote for any more anyway isn't going to pay their mortgage, put food on the table, or give them a sense of worth.

Which is why the mentality of giving Corbyn 10/10 for his abject failure, while sneering at folk who had the sheer audacity of not electing him is the sort of thinking that will hand Johnson the 2025 GE right now.
  • 1
  • 31
  • 32
  • 33
  • 34
  • 35
  • 79
Marina Hyde - woman of fire

Marina is lava. https://www.theguardian.com/comme[…]

Meanwhile in America

Sad news. Didn't the Repubs prevent Obama appoi[…]

Boris Johnson

No comment needed... https://twitter.com/DavidGau[…]

Michael Gove

https://twitter.com/room808/status/130687105930039[…]