BREAKING: The Brownites didn't really like the Blairites

[You kip if you want to...]

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/labour/8567022/Labour-coup-Ed-Balls-and-his-five-fellow-plotters.html

Why can the media never let this go? We get it, Brown hated his boss from about 2002, onwards, Brown turned out to be a very media-unfriendly PM, Ed Balls was Brown's top man and Ed Miliband was also in there with the Brownites somewhere.

Although, i'm surprised nothing big's ever came out about Miliband's role in all this. Saying that, should there be anything out in the coming days about Miliband, I suppose that it could give the all clear for the Blairites to start closing in on him... Although, there's also a possibility Miliband leaked them himself to torpedo any hopes of a Balls coup - we all know Miliband isn't worried about damaging "allies".

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Why can the media never let this go?

Mostly because they are lazy; this story sold copy in the past, so why won't it now? The vague possibility of any reputational damage would be an afterthought, unless the way the newspaper business is run has changed greatly overnight.

Anyway, the only thing of interest here is how the Torygraph got hold of the papers in the first place; the rest we either knew or ought to have guessed. Politicians scheme against each other? How shocking. Anyone would think that power struggles were an inherent part of power structures or something. As for the political impact of these or any future 'revelations'... eh... the relevant people know all this stuff (and more, presumably) anyway. Besides, who wants to end up like Charles Clarke?

[True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)]

Besides, who wants to end up like Charles Clarke?

Who?

[Phony Moderate]

Is there really much difference between them ideologically?

[You kip if you want to...]

Is there really much difference between them ideologically?

I'd say the Blairites are a tiny bit more to the right, but not really.

[Leftbehind]

I think Brownites can be at times argued to be centre left, but Blairites are nearly always centre-right. Just compare the directions each of the Miliband brothers (would) have taken Labour. They still follow the same general path, but there's a sense of awkwardness and begrudging feeling from Brownites, but only fanaticism with Blairites.

[Silent Hunter]

I appear to be not the only one who thinks this is really suspiciously timed; it's been a bad week for the Coalition after all...

[You kip if you want to...]

The story seems to have started to creep into an area that could be described as "toxic" or "leadership crisis" over the last 24 hours. Could just be the Daily Fail, but it's worth keeping a check on.

Apparently some of Balls' own supporters have been saying stuff along the lines of he'd be the "Mad man next door" is Miliband ever took over in number 10 and Ed's been openly "slagging him off in colourful language". I wonder if Ed's people made the leaks. Some Miliband supporters have also been saying that they'll give him until conference to turn things around or he'll be out soon enough.

But then again, this is Labour. By definition, we're not the Tories, so we don't do "division" or "leadership crisis" very well.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2011/jun/11/ed-miliband-labour-leader-leaks
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2002631/Ed-Miliband-s-dislike-macho-Ed-Balls-open-secret.html#ixzz1P0edYExG

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Sums up my own views of him quite well, to be honest.

But then again, if David replaced Ed, i'd be happy with the leader, but it could be the worst decision Labour could make. The Shakespearean Miliband tragedy would be too much. Double fraternacide? Really?

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Sunday paper stories don't = a crisis of any kind, especially if they're just people blowing off steam off the record.

As a general point about 'aides to x have said that x has said nasty things about y' stories, it should be remembered that if the relationship between Blair and Brown tells us anything, it's something quite surprising; even in politics people who hate each other can work together for much longer than seems at all likely. Things only happen when people move openly against each other, and that's so dangerous that nine times out of ten it isn't worth even contemplating. And, for what little my opinion is worth, I'm fairly sure that this is every bit as true about the coalition as it is about senior figures in the Labour Party.

[You kip if you want to...]

David's "Leader's Speech that never was" has also been leaked.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/david-miliband-poised-to-replace-brother-say-friends-2296525.html
http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2011/jun/10/david-miliband-labour-leadership-speech

[afleitch]

Bloody good speech actually. It said more about the economy than we've heard all year.

[You kip if you want to...]

If I could vote in the leadership election again:
1 David
2 Burnham
3 Balls
4 Ed Miliband
5 Diane

[Filuwaúrdjan]

David Miliband hath spoken. And he say: shut up everyone.

[You kip if you want to...]

ICM is showing Miliband more unpopualr than Clegg, just by the way. Although, I think there's a difference between loathing (Clegg) and the perception of sheer incompetance (Ed).

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

The Brownites should have been more public in their hatred. Blair sucks.