Political round up.............

First topic message reminder :

Turn up for the books.............The hard left guy gets on the ballot for the Labour leadership !!....Managed to bag 35 nominations although some were chucked at him by Burnham who will no doubt pick up many of his second preferences...........

Corbyn has no chance....

However it means one of the other three is likely to get hurt in the first round..........Corbyn no doubt will hoover up the extreme nutty left of which there are no doubt plenty in the Labour party and will probably get enough to take him through the first round !!...

(Cruddas finished top in the 2007 Deputy leader race after the first round (He was the "left" candidate)...Of course Harman and Johnson did better as the rounds progresses with second prefs...)

That means one of the three favorites is likely to be eliminated first..................

Latest odds............

Burnham 10/11
Kendall 5/2
Cooper 3/1
Corbyn 66/1 .................

Oh come on Duty...

If you like a candidate you aren't going to change because a union like Unite you aren't part of... want Corbyn..

Besides I thought Unite supported Labour...

Corbyn....Do me a favor..

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/labour/11732639/Jeremy-Corbyn-leaps-into-second-place-in-race-for-Labour-leadership-supporters.html

He's in second place now! Come on, Jeremy, yours for the taking!

Corbyn's success has all but assured Andy Burnham will win i think

Exactly.

Once again the Unions hold sway, hopefully the electorate takes notice and remembers this in 5 years time...

to be fair Toppy Liz Kendall has had a terrible campaign and Yvette who has done quite well will probably lose because of her husband sadly, so if Burnham does win I can't really blame the Unions like was the case 5 years. I know a lot of Tories who are voting in this leadership election

How do Tories vote in the leadership election??

Surely it's only open to pary members, MPs, connected groups (e.g. Unions) etc??

Kendall has been terrible, guess there's no chance of a Burnham/Cooper combo?

no that's where your wrong if you pay £3 you could get a vote providing you say your not a supporter of Labour. Its barmy and wrong in my eyes, ive had 3 Tory friends do it and that's only who I know!! needless to say they have told me they are voting Corbyn

wheelchair1991 wrote:no that's where your wrong if you pay £3 you could get a vote providing you say your not a supporter of Labour.  Its barmy and wrong in my eyes, ive had 3 Tory friends do it and that's only who I know!! needless to say they have told me they are voting Corbyn

You're joking, right? You have to be, surely?!?

Yep, I chucked Labour £3 as well - voting for Corbyn, too!

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/general-election-2015/politics-blog/11680016/Why-Tories-should-join-Labour-and-back-Jeremy-Corbyn.html

Well If you want to waste 3 pounds do it...

He's screwed when he gets to second preferences.....

That is pretty sad duty

wheelchair1991 wrote:That is pretty sad duty

...but not really a surprise eh? This is the sort of petty stupidity that our budding politicians either get involved in when they're less well known and/or encourage their supporters in so doing. What a way to run a country. Pathetic for something potentially so important.

You can pay for/buy votes? That's pathetic and worryingly undemocratic.

wheelchair1991 wrote:That is pretty sad duty

Why? The Labour party, in their continued idiocy, have opened the doors (not again!) to allow pretty much anyone to vote.

And if I can do my bit to ensure the backward, vile Labour party never get into office again, and never do damage to this country again, I will.

Duty281 wrote:

wheelchair1991 wrote:That is pretty sad duty

Why? The Labour party, in their continued idiocy, have opened the doors (not again!) to allow pretty much anyone to vote.

And if I can do my bit to ensure the backward, vile Labour party never get into office again, and never do damage to this country again, I will.

Given people often start out with leftish leaning political beliefs and move right as they age, you should be quite something when you reach your dotage.

navyblueshorts wrote:

Duty281 wrote:

wheelchair1991 wrote:That is pretty sad duty

Why? The Labour party, in their continued idiocy, have opened the doors (not again!) to allow pretty much anyone to vote.

And if I can do my bit to ensure the backward, vile Labour party never get into office again, and never do damage to this country again, I will.

Given people often start out with leftish leaning political beliefs and move right as they age, you should be quite something when you reach your dotage.

Well...I rather liked the Liberal Democrats in 2010 when I was 14 - does that count?

TopHat24/7 wrote:You can pay for/buy votes? That's pathetic and worryingly undemocratic.

You have to pay to be a member of any party which enables you to vote, just you can be asupporter of labour and pay £3 without being a full member like me, you can vote in the leadership then

Duty281 wrote:

navyblueshorts wrote:

Duty281 wrote:

wheelchair1991 wrote:That is pretty sad duty

Why? The Labour party, in their continued idiocy, have opened the doors (not again!) to allow pretty much anyone to vote.

And if I can do my bit to ensure the backward, vile Labour party never get into office again, and never do damage to this country again, I will.

Given people often start out with leftish leaning political beliefs and move right as they age, you should be quite something when you reach your dotage.

Well...I rather liked the Liberal Democrats in 2010 when I was 14 - does that count?

Yep. That'll satisfy the left-to-right movement fine .

Duty is giving a 3 pound donation to Labour's campaigning fund....

When Burnham/Cooper wins I'm sure they'll be ever so grateful !!

I'll give all the other parties six quid to ensure Labour are continually out-flanked!

Do what you like mate......I certainly won't be donating to a cause I loathe anytime soon....

Corbyn is a big outsider for a reason..

No, no, no..he was a big outsider! 150/1 shot, or something around there.

He's now, arguably, the second favourite.

Its a distraction from how much support Burnham has from the unions

He's not second favorite...He's last with the odds makers. .

Duty you show a painful lack of understanding on political matters if you think Corbyn is second favorite

wheelchair1991 wrote:Duty you show a painful lack of understanding on political matters if you think Corbyn is second favorite

Arguably! That's the key word. Please verse yourself on what I've said before jumping in.

In other words you can make an argument for him being second favourite - but he isn't definitely the second favourite.

And the argument you can make for him being the second favourite is: backed by Unite, backed by 28 constituencies (just behind Burnham), and receiving, I think, more media attention than Kendall or Cooper. .

Duty not everyone signed to vote through the Unions will be voting for Corbyn....People do have their own minds....

I imagine some female members may want a female leader...and some male and female members may want Labour to have a chance of winning...

Do the Union voters not get directed then? Thought the Unions (at least previously) had some kind of direct control over voting.

They'll give reasons documenting why Corbyn is a good idea....

However Ed Militant looks like Farage compared to this guy..

250,000 Labour members.... Corbyn is on 15 points according to a poll..

Add in 50,000 new sign ups and 50,000 Union voters...If he's lucky to get 60 percent of both which he won't...

That's 97,000 of 350,000 ......Just over 25 percent...

He's so left...If you like his agenda surely you vote with your first preference and not second..

Corbyn has no chance...Rule Kendal out too.

TRUSSMAN66 wrote:Duty not everyone signed to vote through the Unions will be voting for Corbyn....People do have their own minds....

I imagine some female members may want a female leader...and  some male and female members may want Labour to have a chance of winning...

Never said everyone signed to vote through the unions will vote for Corbyn - but a substantial number will.

I don't think Corbyn will win, I think Burnham will, but I would not be surprised if Corbyn comes second.

He should certainly beat Kendall.

Third for me Duty......Considering that Kendal will be out first....15-20 percent of secondary votes will be shared out and the fact Cooper is the only other female in it must be a bonus...

He'd have to have a big first inning lead on her...

I imagine you'd have to be seriously screwed in the head to have Corbyn second and her first...

Yes, the moment will soon give way to cold reality, but...

http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/2015/07/jeremy-corbyn-course-come-top-labour-leadership-election

One survey even has Corbyn 15 points ahead! #comeonjez

Yes Duty...

The new statesman - "Poll shows it likely Corbyn wins first round !!"..

Shame for the Tories it's not FPTP..

Corbyn won't win mate...

What a difference a few weeks make..

Burnham 5/6
Kendall 3/1
Cooper 4/1
Corbyn 20/1

Burnham 5/6
Cooper 11/4
Corbyn 3/1
Kendall 11/1

Learn from this campaign kendall...........It's been a horror show !!.

Burnham got buried last time so you can come again..

I don't think Kendall will run again. A Tristram Hunt type i guess will run next time as the face of her wing of the party

Tristram Hunt reminds me of that Harry Enfield character..

Corbyn closes in on leadership, screams the Times, after a YouGov poll of 1,000 people marks him as the winner - he p!sses home in the first round, before holding off Burnham with aplomb in the second.

He is the second favourite with bookmakers now - 2/1 at some places! #jezwecan

All the Conservative supporting general public giving Labour £3 and voting Corbyn are wasting their money.

Regardless of who wins, the PLP will have learnt their lesson from the past 5 years. So there are only 2 possible scenarios;
1.) Burnham or Cooper win the election and the Conservative supporters have swelled the Labour party coffers for nothing.
2.) Or, Corbyn wins and, after a year or two as leader, his poll ratings are so abysmal that the PLP oust him and a new leader is installed. And the Conservative supporters have swelled the Labour Party coffers for nothing.

Either way, as a CLP member, I'm very happy for this additional income, I hope it is put to good use.

As for the leadership election, I'm ambivalent. If Corbyn does win it matters not as, as stated above, he won't lead the Party at the 2020 GE regardless. However, as an interim opposition leader, I think he might actually be quite effective in attacking Conservative policy.

Realistically, Corbyn makes the final round but is beaten by Burnham, who will gain all the support of Cooper and Kendall's campaigns.

The idea that Corbyn winning this leadership election would forever doom the Labour Party to the election wilderness is embarrassingly stupid.

If Corbyn wins the election and is ditched as leader inside two years by his own party, any credibility that the Labour party has left will be completely vanquished. It would also further undermine whatever direction the Labour party are going in.

That would do more to consign Labour to the wilderness forever, than just voting Corbyn in and letting him lead his party into 2020.

Nonsense. What you need to remember is; the electorate, generally speaking, have short memories. Osborne's 2012 Omnishambles budget, and the double dip recession, cast serious doubts, at the time, over his, and the Conservatives, ability to manage the economy. By May 2015, these crises barely registered and the Conservatives won a Parliamentary majority based on their ability to manage the economy.

The point is; If Corbyn wins, which he won't, and proceeds to perform poorly and is subsequently ousted by a more popular and centrist candidate, then that won't necessarily harm the Party's chances of winning in 2020. It will depend entirely on who would replace Corbyn, and the timing of the coup.

Provided Labour go in to 2020 with a party unified behind a strong and popular leader, and with a good manifesto, then they have a chance to win.

There are too many variables to discuss the 2020 GE right now (Conservative leader, Conservative performance / popularity, state of the SNP, etc.). But, like I said, it is utterly stupid to think that a Corbyn victory in 2015 precludes the possibility of a Labour victory in 2020 or beyond.

The Conservatives won a parliamentary majority because the electorate, predominantly, did not trust Labour with the economy. The electorate may have short memories, but they are not that short.

The Conservatives' ability to manage the economy well has not been felt by a large deal of people. It was, moreover, that the electorate felt they were less likely to f**k the economy up than Labour. This was chiefly because Miliband had failed to dispel doubts that his party had learnt the brutal lessons from their last time in office.

The surge in support for the SNP also helped: Cameron was able to paint a truly terrifying image of a Britain with a Labour/SNP coalition, and Labour lost their seats in Scotland.

If Corbyn wins this election, and is subsequently ousted in a couple of years, it will be incredibly harmful to the prospects of the Labour party in 2020, and it would be ludicrous fantasy to think otherwise. As well as the tumultuous change in direction that would inevitably entail in such a short span of time, it would destroy any last vestiges of unity and cohesion in the party.

In such a scenario, Labour would be even more unelectable than in 2015.

And of course, if Corbyn does win and leads his party at 2020, then Labour certainly would be defeated. It is likely to be a heavy defeat, as well.

True, if Labour go in 2020 as a unified party, with a strong leader and a good manifesto, they certainly have a chance of victory. But that simply is not going to happen. The welfare bill, just the other day, showed the strong divides that exist within Labour.

And there is only one man who could be a strong and popular leader, but he has no interest in standing: Dan Jarvis.

Labour are in terminal decline. They have lost sight of what they are meant to stand for; they are torn between the distant past and the recent past.

Yes, it is a shame that Jarvis doesn't want to run. My opinion is that he is biding his time, I expect he will be Party Leader at some point in the future, and, very potentially, PM.

Again, if Corbyn wins, and is ousted in 2017, then it will depend on many unknown factors, including his replacement, as to wether Labour are able to be competitive in 2020.

I agree with some of what you've said above, but you've said absolutely nothing which changes my mind on this particular issue. 5 years is a long time and I maintain that a Corbyn victory in 2015 does not preclude the possibility of a Labour victory in 2020. Yes, if the Party is divided, rudderless, and poorly led in 2020 then they'll lose, probably very heavily. But these are factors which will depend on a LOT more than just who wins in September.

Also, I agree that Labour are struggling and could be facing some considerable time in opposition. However, terminal decline is, in my opinion, an overstatement. The Conservatives have a narrow majority, it isn't comparable to the absolute rout they suffered in 1997. Similarly premature obituaries were being written for the Conservative Party back then, and look where they are now.

A few thoughts on the Corbyn charge:
1- I'm sure there were people out there saying including him would be a mistake at the time, and a growing group seems to now think it was. I think the Tories might want to pay attention to that too, because I don't think a Corbyn lead Labour would be quite as much fun for them as some seem to think.
2- What does it say about Labour when Corbyn is apparently so far ahead in the polls, but had to borrow MPs to get nominated? Especially when you remember that if David Milliband had been elected, it would have been largely thanks to his support from the PLP.
3- This has all turned in to a bit of nightmare for Labour, since the whole thing is now pretty much being framed as 'Corbyn vs the other lot'. All it's done is crowd out Burnham and Cooper, and made them seem dull and tired before they've even started.

Why is everyone getting worked up about Corbyn?

Kids, let me tell you about another so-called wicked guy. He had long hair, and some wild ideas, and he didn't always do what other people thought was right. And that man's name was...I forget. But the point is... I forget that, too. You know who I'm talking about! He used to drive that blue car.

As stated, I agree that Corbyn could be a very effective opposition leader. He would have no chance of leading Labour to a GE victory, but 5 years is a long time. If he wins, which he won't, then I've no issue with it, provided the Party replace him with someone better in a few years time. Someone like Jarvis, or maybe even Starmer, if he proves to be a talented politician. The worry is that, there is potentially a dearth of senior talent in the Labour Party at this moment. Not unlike the Conservatives circa 1997 - 2005.

I don't think it really matters how Burnham and Cooper look right now. If Burnham wins, for example, how he performs in the role will be the only factor. If he does a good job no one will remember or care if he looked a little unoriginal and/or centrist when campaigning against Corbyn.

Top Simpsons reference there, Superfly.

Gent

While you are talking some sense, I do think that Corbyn's current popularity with the rank and file Labour members is significant in a couple of ways:
1 - Shows that there is still a strongly Socialist wing to the party who feel that the centrist (Blairite?) wing of the party does not represent them or their philosophy of what Labour is and should be.
2 - That non of the centrist / moderate candidates seem to have broad appeal even within the party.

In a way, electing Corbyn might not be the disaster that some high profile Blairites are portraying. OK, they will not win a GE with Corbyn in charge (not enough appeal to Middle England), but they might get back a lot of support in Scotland where a credible Socialist party would still have strong support.

Perhaps Labour are currently at their Ian Duncan-Smith moment, where they elect a leader to shore up their base, before moving back towards a less extreme position over the next few years. Of course Labour do have a bit of an identity crisis at present - are they the party of the working class / manual worker / Union member or are they the party of the soft liberal left of north London?

Gentleman01 wrote:All the Conservative supporting general public giving Labour £3 and voting Corbyn are wasting their money.

Regardless of who wins, the PLP will have learnt their lesson from the past 5 years. So there are only 2 possible scenarios;
1.) Burnham or Cooper win the election and the Conservative supporters have swelled the Labour party coffers for nothing.
2.) Or, Corbyn wins and, after a year or two as leader, his poll ratings are so abysmal that the PLP oust him and a new leader is installed. And the Conservative supporters have swelled the Labour Party coffers for nothing.

 

Swelled the party coffers? Behave now, Gent. It's a drop in the ocean compared to what Labour takes in from the Trade Unions and I suspect, for all the hoopla, will only raise a few grand in reality. That's back of the sofa shrapnel that'll get spanked printing leaflefts or making photocopies of marketing collateral to send to these new found 'supporters'.

I actually don't think Corbyn is a disaster for Labour at all.

I agree with Gent's view on myopia/short-termism.

I wonder whether, actually, Corbyn taking over for a couple of years with relatively fire-brand left-wing politics, eventually getting ousted but with enough time (2-3 years) for Labour to 'unite' (no pun intended) behind a strong centrist leader might even be an advantage.

Why does the new Labour leader need 5 years? A centrist replacement for Corbyn would look much much more centrist/right to non-Labour folk in comparison, despite not actually being so, but the harder-left PLP members would at least have had some of their socialist blood-lust satiated and Labour may (if no independence has occured) be able to take back Scotland this way too - given its greater penchant for Leftism.

The biggest thing however, as Gent says, is 5 years is a bloody long time in politics! I look back with smugness at Truss' posts of 3 years ago where he was banging on about imploding Tories and the impending disaster predicted by the polls. I said then as I do now - they're totally irrelevant!

TH / Gent

You are right that 5 years is a VERY long time. We are little more than 5 weeks after the election, which until polling day looked like Labour could be in power at least in coalition with SNP and/or others. Now we have a Labour Party in crisis with a temporary leader who has upset half of the rank and file (and a fair chunk of the PLP) and a 'loony lefty' looking like he could become the next leader.

Where will we be in 5 years? Cameron has said he'll not stand for another term as PM, so do we get Osborne or Boris as the next Tory leader, or will they find someone a little more of this planet?
How will the economy be doing?
Will we still be in the EU, and if so, will Cameron have managed to get any of the reforms and concessions he wants?
Will the Lib Dems come back as a credible choice as a protest vote / constituency MP?
Will the SNP support maintain or will they implode (before / during / after the next Scottish Assembly election)?
Similarly UKIP (my suspicion is they have peaked and it will be increasingly obvious that it is Farage plus a bunch of muppets).

These are all questions to be answered by the time of the next GE. Perhaps by then Labour will have managed to identify a leader who has both some charisma and some electoral appeal - at the moment I think Corbyn at least has the charisma of an honest politician (most ideologues are inherently honest in their opinions), while the other three are absolute no-bodies.

UKIP have peaked - ah, how many times have I heard that one?