2020 Labour Leadership Election

[Zinneke]

I think Dan Jarvis is a good shout. He's a Northerner, ex-Army,  but the question remains as to why he didnt run in 2015.

Starner would be a way to bring the party together if he continues most of Corbyn's 2017 manifesto, just in a more sensible manner.

Abbott or McDonnell would be a repeat of the previous election.

In terms of what will actually happen...probably a member of the Soft Left Momentum can tolerate.

[Zinneke]

I think the answer for the leadership election is Rayner... she checks all the boxes: acceptable to the left, woman, good life story, NOT from London, charismatic, and so on.

Unfortunately people have concluded Jess Phillips is the front runner based on your logic. Not sure she's acceptable to momentum though

[Zinneke]

Well its actually RLB and Nandy, but thanks for your input

Starmer does have definite positives, the two main concerns people have (ideology aside, anyway) are his supposed lack of charisma and his previous strong anti-Brexitism being used against him by Tories and their media supporters (on a more trivial level, his being a "Sir" might be weaponised as well)

And the fact that he is a human rights lawyer and that's a Very Bad Thing these days...

[Zinneke]

Who will get Jarvis' endorsement?

[Zinneke]

Speaking of Scottish independence, Nandys bizarre comments on Catalonia... she's not as bright as some people (including the FT) think she is, is she?

[Zinneke]

Lisa Nandy demonstrating she knows nothing about Scotland.

She obviously wasn't suggesting that the police go & beat up Scottish nationalists & imprison Nicola Sturgeon

She's bright (contrary to what somebody suggested upthread) but also slightly unworldly in a way that the offspring of academics can be. Phillips is less clever, but "streetwise" enough to express a hard line unionist position without (on this occasion, anyway) putting her foot in her mouth.

I'm sorry, I know it's still far off to evaluate these candidates based on whether they'd be a good PM (which since Blair especially has been heavily foreign policy orientated role) but starting to make comparisons between Scottish and Catalan nationalists on one side and the populist Right on the other with the simple argument that they all call themselves nationalists, is either being intellectually dishonest with her electorate, or proof that she knows diddly squat about political cultures outside of Westminster and "the town's". Which is concerning if your picking a potential PM candidate. And that's not mentioning the distasteful way she insinuated that the PSOE hardline response to Catalonia was a great thing (albeit much better than the PP response.).

Then there's her Brexit position...full of contradictions like why she didn't take Kinnocks stance of voting for May's deal knowing that binning it could pave the way for hard Brexit. Or saying she is sticking up for Northerners disgruntled with immigration and foreign capital but wants the 4 freedoms maintained.

Her overall manner and calmness is admirable though.

[Zinneke]

Switching my support from Starmer to Nandy. (I obviously support Starmer in the second round versus RLB, though)

Colour me genuinely surprised. What particularly do you not like about RLB? (aside from the obvious of course...)

Unelectable. Ideal candidate is Keir Starmer's persona with Lisa Nandy's policies.

Given how long 5 years is it might not matter how electable this Labour leader is to the general public. They have to focus on rebuilding the party and being effective opposition.

Still think Starner is the best one though.

[Zinneke]

https://mobile.twitter.com/PippaCrerar/status/1222639774885982208

Could the Tories realistically financially cripple the Labour party by having more frequent elections? There were rumours that the two main Spanish parties were comfortable with so many elections because they knew that Ciudadanos and Podemos couldn't keep up. Wondering what are the rules in terms of finances in the UK.

[Zinneke]

It won't be 'hardline British unionism' that wins votes, it'll be seen as not being hostage to the SNP and their values. Don't confuse the two because they are very different. Of course, the SNP will never ever in a billion years put Labour in government, but the average voter doesn't know that.

And speaking of which, the SNP will never ever in a billion years put Labour in government, so recovery in Scotland is essential, otherwise you'll just get 2015 all over again. How to do that is another question entirely. Throwing Leonard off Ben Nevis would be a good start though.

Why do you think that?

[Zinneke]

I am no great fan of the "Trot Left" but this was worth releasing. A lot of these people shouldn't be in the party if they are willing to destroy it. It's really, pretty simple. If you don't like the leadership you can play a passive role,focus on more local politics (like Burnham), play a constructive opposition role in order to keep your faction institutionally relevant (like many soft Left) or leave the party. There's absolutely no justification for weakening your own party and putting potentially people from your own factions out of jobs to to spite its leadership.

[Zinneke]

I read through half of it and while the rest read out of a Thick of It script, what disgusted me the most (although obviously unsurprising) was the naked nepotism..."I heard you daughter was in need of experience"....this culture has to be stopped across the board, and not just in Westminster, in other European capitals too.

Also the Momentum guys are out doing these, which are quite amusing.