The next leader of the Labour Party?

[????]

...they can't really be serious can they?

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/labour/11745416/Labour-needs-saving-from-itself-and-Cameron-is-the-man-to-do-it.html

[Louisa]

He won't win. But he should win. He's the only man in that shortlist who represents anything remotely true to the traditions of the Labour movement. I'd rather commit political suicide standing by my principles, than be elected to oversee things I do not believe in. The man has principles, it should count for something.

Louisa.

[Otta]

I think the fact he's something different from all the other identikit candidates is probably helping his cause. I joined the party in the wake of the election, but have been left totally cold so far, and actually so pissed off with the aount of bloody emails and texts they're sending that I'm genuinely having anti Labour feelings as a result.

Also, I would say that part of Labour's problem is that they've let the tories basically rule the rhetoric for the past 5 years without ever sticking up for themselves. And now they are supposed to let the tories tell them what went on and what they need to do?

Since the election I'm hearing more "loony left" comments than ever before, and to be honest it's tiresome. It's suggesting that if you have any left wing beliefs you're some sort of nut job.

I'm not at all convinced by ANY iof the candidates, but at least this bloke would make it interesting.

[Otta]

Also, what Louisa said.

[Earl Aelfheah]

The Telegraph were calling on Conservatives to vote for Corby (to 'destroy the Labour party')the other day. Didn't seem to concerned about ensuring a strong opposition then http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/labour/11741861/How-you-can-help-Jeremy-Corbyn-win-and-destroy-the-Labour-Party.html

[Earl Aelfheah]

Agree with Louisa.

[????]

Otta Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Also, what Louisa said.

Rubbish, both of you..unless you want the purity and freedom of permanent opposition....and sod the consequences on the poor etc

Even, EVEN, Polly T sees the hollowness of that position

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2015/jul/16/tim-farron-lib-dem-leader

[david_carnell]

I don't agree with corbyn on everything and I'm unconvinced he'd be electable but dear god at least he says SOMETHING. Rather than a string of empty platitudes and sound bites.

Internally, the party are terrified of him winning.

[Jah Lush]

I'm sick and tired of New Labour. They're just Tories in disguise. Blairism was Thatcher-lite. The Labour Party needs to get back to it's core values and principles. The Tory press are already smearing Corbyn with the usual tired old "loony left" clich?s. He'd get my vote as the next Labour leader.

[????]

So, really, as this thread shows, there's a bunch of Labour party supporters (Lousa excepted) who just want to be in permanent opposition but pure and comfortable to be 'wailing' at the evil Tories.

Bravo.

[Jeremy]

If people considered Ed "too anti-business", then god knows what they'll make of this guy.

It doesn't make any sense to take the party too far to the left... you might please a relatively small number of people, but all you're really doing is leaving the centrists no viable alternative from the tories.

[????]

Tory lite - until they imploded under internal wrangling and TBs awful decision on Iraq. New Labour had regained Labour's record for economic competence against huge odds; massivley increased investment in Education and health after the Thatcher years; started neccessary reform of the education and health.

It's socialist worker/student type idiocy to dismiss New Labour and Blair before Iraq. They did much for the country.

[????]

Jeremy Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> If people considered Ed "too anti-business", then

> god knows what they'll make of this guy.

>

> It doesn't make any sense to take the party too

> far to the left... you might please a relatively

> small number of people, but all you're really

> doing is leaving the centrists no viable

> alternative from the tories.

Tony Benn after the 1983 defeat "At least it shows there are 6 million socialists in the country" - the words of another purist far happierr in glorious opposition

[Jah Lush]

???? Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> So, really, as this thread shows, there's a bunch

> of Labour party supporters (Lousa excepted) who

> just want to be in permanent opposition but pure

> and comfortable to be 'wailing' at the evil

> Tories.

>

> Bravo.

That's utter fecking bollocks. Basically, you're saying that going back to a more socialist viewpoint is a bad thing. I think the tide is beginning to turn in this country and possibly America too with Bernie Saunders running for the democrats. It's a pity it wasn't shown more at the last election.

[Louisa]

I disagree. I think you need to make the case for your beliefs to be successful. The old argument that elections are only won on the centre ground have been proved misleading. The truth is, making your case and presenting your policies in a positive and agreeable manner can and will shift where the centre ground is, and that is the real way to change things. If we all wanted camera friendly leaders who agreed with each other we would never change anything!

Louisa.

[Jeremy]

Yep.. for me, Blair's labour were probably the closest we've had to the kind of government I'd like to see, but the Iraq war (and not forgetting the whole crazy "God told me to invade Iraq" episode) annihilated his legacy.

[*Bob*]

???? Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Tony Benn after the 1983 defeat "At least it shows

> there are 6 million socialists in the country" -

> the words of another purist far happierr in

> glorious opposition

IMO many old skool Labourites see themselves (and are happy to see themselves) more as an 'organised pressure group' than as a potential party of government - so I think you make a fine point ????.

[miga]

Meanwhile, as the latest budget shows, the Tories continue to successfully take the middle; increasing basic wage and the populist/popular BTL restrictions. This is on top of already being pretty socially liberal (an issue with other nominally center right parties in e.g. the US or Australia).

I'm not sure Labour can take back the middle even if they wanted to.

[miga]

But yes, what Louisa and Otta said, what's the point of Labour if it holds few Labour values. Whatever they were doing the last two elections clearly isn't working for them, and Corbyn taking the helm at least has ideological clarity.

[Jeremy]

If only we had a third party who represent those of us who support a market economy, but are liberal minded, and supportive of a welfare state and social justice... wouldn't that be nice...

[????]

Jeremy Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> If only we had a third party who represent those

> of us who support a market economy, but are

> liberal minded, and supportive of a welfare state

> and social justice... wouldn't that be nice...

We do - but they are in the sane bit of the Tories, the Blairite wing of the Labour Party and the non-lefty/hippy bit of the Liberal Democrats

[Otta]

david_carnell Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> I don't agree with corbyn on everything and I'm

> unconvinced he'd be electable but dear god at

> least he says SOMETHING. Rather than a string of

> empty platitudes and sound bites.

>

> Internally, the party are terrified of him

> winning.

DC said it better than me. I am not saying I want Corbyn, or that I want to forever see them in opposition forever.

But there can't only be one way to successfully run a country and what I want is to have a genuine choice.

[miga]

Jeremy Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> If only we had a third party who represent those

> of us who support a market economy, but are

> liberal minded, and supportive of a welfare state

> and social justice... wouldn't that be nice...

I'm not being funny - but I think at the moment this is the Tories.

[Otta]

You think the Tories are supportive of the welfare state?

I honestly believe a lot of them would scrap it tomorrow if they could.

[Loz]

Jeremy Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Yep.. for me, Blair's labour were probably the closest we've had to the kind of government I'd

> like to see, but the Iraq war (and not forgetting the whole crazy "God told me to invade Iraq"

> episode) annihilated his legacy.

I'm with you there - the first year of Blair was exactly right. Shame it went downhill with Iraq. I think 2001 was the last time I voted Labour in a general election.