2020 Labour Leadership Election

[brucejoel99]

- Nandy is lightweight and "sounds dumb"

Which is sure to be a major handicap against the famously articulate Boris Johnson.

Lisa Nandy is brown, you see

huh?

She's of Indian origin.

[Intell]

Interesting about Lisa Nandy, her father was a marxist which was the case with Ed Millibrand and Corbyn's most likely as well.

[Okay, maybe Mike Johnson is a competent parliamentarian.]

On the contrary, that's what they should do. Labour hasn't won an election since Tony Blair led the party and before that, their last win was in the 1970's. Love it or hate it, neoliberalism allowed them to gain large majorities in Parliament under Blair. If Labour is smart, they will move to the center.

New Labour was not what you think it was. The point was to advance towards socialist goals through market mechanisms and to sell this with a certain populist panache. The biggest promise of all was to save the welfare state, to improve other public services and to tackle persistent social problems through a massive injection of cash to be extracted, in the first instance, from a windfall tax on the profits of questionably privatised utilities!

Tony Blair disagrees with that right now.

Blair has drifted well to the right since leaving office.

[🦀🎂🦀🎂]

Those survey figures make sense; we know that Starmer is well-liked by Labour members, we know that a certain proportion will back a cheese sandwich if said sandwich is seen as the 'official' Left candidate, we know that Thornberry is respected but not liked, that Cooper is seen as yesterday's woman, and the rest is basically name recognition.

Alternatively, vigorously opposing small-minded Brexiteerism wasn't and isn't just a flash in the Labour pan but is actually at the heart of the party's political identity. I think an understated number of Labour people feel that Corbyn's weird fence-straddling on the issue not only didn't help win many Leave constituencies, but it didn't help prevent Britain from trading its global standing and societal openness for atavistic Brexit knuckle-dragging. The idea that this is primarily a Blairite/Corbynite civil war is actually overstated, because the Blairites lost and lost badly and the party is a Corbynite party. For many Starmer presents an opportunity to do Corbynism in a competitive, credible, and more firmly European way. Frankly, they seem exactly right about that.

Bless.

It was Labour, particularly the left of the party, that opposed the European Community in the first place. It was the Tories from Heath onwards who were fans. Being pro-EU was quintessentially a Blairite/New Labour project, it has nothing to do with the traditional left in this country.

Besides I have bad news for you, Starmer said today Remain is dead.

You may be one of the few who sees the Brexit issue solely within the bounds of formal EU membership. I, and I suspect the half of the UK that opposes Brexit, does not. The question now is not whether the UK should remain an EU member but rather whether the same xenophobia and atavistic smallness, the same mindless populism, that launched the whole Brexit process should dominate the public discourse in Britain. I assure you that's very much an open and central question in Labour and throughout the country.

Then the question is, can the UK remain internationalist even outside of the EU, and to me the answer is an emphatic "duh". Although there obviously is a lot of vulgar isolationism around, there are plenty of people in the Leave cadre with internationalist views, and the party doesn't exactly lack for people in its past (going back to Gaitskell) who were stridently  internationalist and interested in building a democratic and decolonized Commonwealth over the European project.

[CumbrianLefty]

On the contrary, that's what they should do. Labour hasn't won an election since Tony Blair led the party and before that, their last win was in the 1970's. Love it or hate it, neoliberalism allowed them to gain large majorities in Parliament under Blair. If Labour is smart, they will move to the center.

New Labour was not what you think it was. The point was to advance towards socialist goals through market mechanisms and to sell this with a certain populist panache. The biggest promise of all was to save the welfare state, to improve other public services and to tackle persistent social problems through a massive injection of cash to be extracted, in the first instance, from a windfall tax on the profits of questionably privatised utilities!

Tony Blair disagrees with that right now.

Blair has drifted well to the right since leaving office.

As has what we call "Blairism".

[afleitch]

On the contrary, that's what they should do. Labour hasn't won an election since Tony Blair led the party and before that, their last win was in the 1970's. Love it or hate it, neoliberalism allowed them to gain large majorities in Parliament under Blair. If Labour is smart, they will move to the center.

New Labour was not what you think it was. The point was to advance towards socialist goals through market mechanisms and to sell this with a certain populist panache. The biggest promise of all was to save the welfare state, to improve other public services and to tackle persistent social problems through a massive injection of cash to be extracted, in the first instance, from a windfall tax on the profits of questionably privatised utilities!

It was Butskellism for a post Thatcherite Britain. New Labour  even had a now long forgotten obsession with creating full employment, in part by creating jobs/training. It spent big. Bigger (as a percentage of GDP) than most post war governments reaching 48%. Even Corbyn didn't propose as much.

While Labour would rather eat bees than look to the SNP in Scotland which now has both built in support and geographically well spread support even after 12 years, perhaps it should. It's replaced Labour completely and ingerited it's 'stop the Tories' appeal.

Part of the reason

[Intell]

On the contrary, that's what they should do. Labour hasn't won an election since Tony Blair led the party and before that, their last win was in the 1970's. Love it or hate it, neoliberalism allowed them to gain large majorities in Parliament under Blair. If Labour is smart, they will move to the center.

New Labour was not what you think it was. The point was to advance towards socialist goals through market mechanisms and to sell this with a certain populist panache. The biggest promise of all was to save the welfare state, to improve other public services and to tackle persistent social problems through a massive injection of cash to be extracted, in the first instance, from a windfall tax on the profits of questionably privatised utilities!

It was Butskellism for a post Thatcherite Britain. New Labour  even had a now long forgotten obsession with creating full employment, in part by creating jobs/training. It spent big. Bigger (as a percentage of GDP) than most post war governments reaching 48%. Even Corbyn didn't propose as much.

While Labour would rather eat bees than look to the SNP in Scotland which now has both built in support and geographically well spread support even after 12 years, perhaps it should. It's replaced Labour completely and ingerited it's 'stop the Tories' appeal.

Part of the reason

Nationalistic rhetoric tends to be popular.

[afleitch]

On the contrary, that's what they should do. Labour hasn't won an election since Tony Blair led the party and before that, their last win was in the 1970's. Love it or hate it, neoliberalism allowed them to gain large majorities in Parliament under Blair. If Labour is smart, they will move to the center.

New Labour was not what you think it was. The point was to advance towards socialist goals through market mechanisms and to sell this with a certain populist panache. The biggest promise of all was to save the welfare state, to improve other public services and to tackle persistent social problems through a massive injection of cash to be extracted, in the first instance, from a windfall tax on the profits of questionably privatised utilities!

It was Butskellism for a post Thatcherite Britain. New Labour  even had a now long forgotten obsession with creating full employment, in part by creating jobs/training. It spent big. Bigger (as a percentage of GDP) than most post war governments reaching 48%. Even Corbyn didn't propose as much.

While Labour would rather eat bees than look to the SNP in Scotland which now has both built in support and geographically well spread support even after 12 years, perhaps it should. It's replaced Labour completely and ingerited it's 'stop the Tories' appeal.

Part of the reason

Nationalistic rhetoric tends to be popular.

Conversely internationalist rhetoric is the SNP's bread and butter; Scotland in Europe has been their consistent aim for over thirty years.

[Intell]

On the contrary, that's what they should do. Labour hasn't won an election since Tony Blair led the party and before that, their last win was in the 1970's. Love it or hate it, neoliberalism allowed them to gain large majorities in Parliament under Blair. If Labour is smart, they will move to the center.

New Labour was not what you think it was. The point was to advance towards socialist goals through market mechanisms and to sell this with a certain populist panache. The biggest promise of all was to save the welfare state, to improve other public services and to tackle persistent social problems through a massive injection of cash to be extracted, in the first instance, from a windfall tax on the profits of questionably privatised utilities!

It was Butskellism for a post Thatcherite Britain. New Labour  even had a now long forgotten obsession with creating full employment, in part by creating jobs/training. It spent big. Bigger (as a percentage of GDP) than most post war governments reaching 48%. Even Corbyn didn't propose as much.

While Labour would rather eat bees than look to the SNP in Scotland which now has both built in support and geographically well spread support even after 12 years, perhaps it should. It's replaced Labour completely and ingerited it's 'stop the Tories' appeal.

Part of the reason

Nationalistic rhetoric tends to be popular.

Conversely internationalist rhetoric is the SNP's bread and butter; Scotland in Europe has been their consistent aim for over thirty years.

Yes, but the SNP is most likely largely popular because of their patriotic independent Scotland message.

[SPQR]

RLB today gave Corbyn's leadership "10 out of 10" on ITV...just when you thought it couldn't get worse.

[brucejoel99]

RLB today gave Corbyn's leadership "10 out of 10" on ITV...just when you thought it couldn't get worse.

If he's a 10/10 (indicating that she thinks he's literally perfect), then shouldn't she be encouraging him to carry on as leader?

There's also a 7/10 EU joke that I'm too lazy to make.

Pithy comments aside, this thinking is why the far-left will always lose: you were dealt the worst defeat since 1935 & you can't even say that your leader wasn't 100% perfect, let alone actively bad.

[CumbrianLefty]

Um, maybe she said that *because* of the (utterly ridiculous) way many reacted to Corbyn's 7/10 EU line?

(IMO it was actually one of the *very* few things said on the "remain" side during that wretched 2016 campaign that actually resonated with the voters that needed to be won over from leave - but never mind that, JEMERY CROBYN BAD and that's all that ever mattered with most of our "opinion formers")

[brucejoel99]

Um, maybe she said that *because* of the (utterly ridiculous) way many reacted to Corbyn's 7/10 EU line?

(IMO it was actually one of the *very* few things said on the "remain" side during that wretched 2016 campaign that actually resonated with the voters that needed to be won over from leave - but never mind that, JEMERY CROBYN BAD and that's all that ever mattered with most of our "opinion formers")

I mean, if we're talking about bad Remain campaigns, Labour's Remain campaign itself was also pitiful, at best, & wretched, at worst, & is a large part as to why the vote was lost in my opinion. Like him or loathe him, a lot of people look up to Corbyn, & his "7/10" enthusiasm for remaining certainly did NOT help the cause.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

She's of Indian origin.

Half Indian, yes. Bengali. English on her mother's side: her maternal grandfather was Frank Byers, longtime leader of the Liberals in the Lords and a Dorset MP in the 1940s. Quite a clear family resemblance, actually.

[Lord Halifax]

She's of Indian origin.

Half Indian, yes. Bengali. English on her mother's side: her maternal grandfather was Frank Byers, longtime leader of the Liberals in the Lords and a Dorset MP in the 1940s. Quite a clear family resemblance, actually.

[Zinneke]

Who will get Jarvis' endorsement?

[KaiserDave]

Full support to Starmer I guess, Tories will probably be in power for another 8ish years anyways.

[urutzizu]

Who will get Jarvis' endorsement?

Has not declared yet, but my guess would be Nandy.

An up-to-date tracker of which MPs are supporting whom can be found here: https://order-order.com/2020/01/07/becky-second-keir-rayner-way-ahead-deputy-race/

Regarding Nandy, the consensus appears to be that she was the stand-out performance at the PLP hustings yesterday. Her Betting Odds have shot up to 5/1 for third place. Starmer did well, as expected. Jess Philips did ok. RLB did not get a very positive response, although that was to be expected, considering the audience. Bad for Lewis, Dire for Thornberry.

[EastAnglianLefty]

Yeah, the write-ups don't suggest that either Thornberry or Lewis did especially badly, but they didn't make any inroads. Which is a problem for them, as both have good reasons why they'll struggle to make the ballot paper (Thornberry in most respects just offers the same things as Starmer, but in a less competent and effective fashion; the strongly factional bit of the parliamentary left is all lined up behind RLB and the less factional bit is pretty small, plus a candidate in favour of mandatory reselection isn't likely to appeal to those who would have to face said reselections.)

[CumbrianLefty]

Have to say, slightly surprised that McDonnell is backing the dismal Burgon for deputy.

[Gustaf]

A Labour friend made the following list:

1) Nandy
2) thornberry
3) starmer
4) embrace the destruction of all life on earth
5) lewis / phillips
6) resign membership
7) RLB
Thanos
9) lavery

Discuss with maps.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Have to say, slightly surprised that McDonnell is backing the dismal Burgon for deputy.

He's a factional man first and foremost and while Rayner might be a friend of RLB's she is not part of the cadre.

[Lord Halifax]

Unison has endorsed Starmer.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Unison has endorsed Starmer.

Unison* backed Corbyn in 2016 but a bit reluctantly. They have subsequently been one of the stronger internal voices on the need to treat e.g. the antisemitism scandal seriously and have obviously not liked the way in which Unite have taken over the running of the party.

_{*Who are now the largest of the affiliates, Unite having bled so many members over the past decade.}

[CumbrianLefty]

A Labour friend made the following list:

1) Nandy
2) thornberry
3) starmer
4) embrace the destruction of all life on earth
5) lewis / phillips
6) resign membership
7) RLB
Thanos
9) lavery

Discuss with maps.

Not quite worked out my own order yet, save for having Phillips in the Lavery position here