2020 Labour Leadership Election

[Blair]

The nominations I've been watching have been the big South London CLPs who've had pitched battles for years between the organised right & left

Battersea was a draw between Keir & RLB, Vauxhall (one of the few CLPs Progress still claims to hold) was won by Nandy by 1 vote over Keir & Streatham was won by Keir (despite the left recently winning control)

Lewisham CLPs are next week iirc; has previously been very fertile ground for Momentum but could easily see all three go for Keir in the right situation (or even Nandy in Lewisham East)

The CLP in my seat nominated Starmer from what I've heard. It's been a long long time since I was in it but I remember it being a lefty one. It all means very little though of course.

I actually disagree. I mean looking at the 2010, 2015 & 2016 nomination they all point to the winner; and the fact that Keir is winning so many is because he's picking up a lot of second preferences & has a very good campaign team who've done a lot of groundwork for this.

There's two clear things to happen so far; an influx of rejoiners/new members who are not natural RLB supporters & a small but significant chunk of the 'loyal' left who backed JC in 2016 don't like RLB

Of course it's possible for the whole thing to collapse; but if the race ended this month Keir would win.

[Blair]

Besides this race is so far reconfirming my theory of internal labour races; a competent centre-left mainstream candidate can win if they have A.) Union Backing B.) No Baggage C.) A weak left candidate

And finally there's a huge difference between the labour activists that people perceive as being the membership & the actual 500K+ of members.

[CumbrianLefty]

Dawn Butler is now just one nomination away from getting on the deputy leader ballot.

I would say Murray is likely to make that as well, which leaves just Allin-Khan and (for the leadership) Thornberry struggling - though both are picking up CLPs in dribs and drabs and can't be ruled out yet.

[Serenity Now]

Ipsos MORI have recently carried out some polling about the Labour leadership contenders (edit: of the public, not Labour members). Here's some Tweets from someone who writes for them:

https://twitter.com/CameronGarrett_/status/1223258512463220736?s=20

Here's the full write up:

https://www.ipsos.com/ipsos-mori/en-uk/low-public-awareness-all-labour-leadership-candidates-although-keir-starmer-starting-stronger

[CumbrianLefty]

Becoming clear to me that RLB's somewhat clod-hopping "Corbyn 10/10" comment early on in this campaign may have irreversibly sunk her with a critical portion of the membership.

(for all his supposed woodenness, Starmer in contrast answered that admittedly silly question almost perfectly)

Most people do not want the good aspects of Corbynism junked (and both KS and Nandy have had to acknowledge that) but equally there is little desire to see certain things continue.

(how many Labour members want Milne and Murphy to carry on in their plum posts, for instance? Not many)

[EastAnglianLefty]

Becoming clear to me that RLB's somewhat clod-hopping "Corbyn 10/10" comment early on in this campaign may have irreversibly sunk her with a critical portion of the membership.

(for all his supposed woodenness, Starmer in contrast answered that admittedly silly question almost perfectly)

Most people do not want the good aspects of Corbynism junked (and both KS and Nandy have had to acknowledge that) but equally there is little desire to see certain things continue.

(how many Labour members want Milne and Murphy to carry on in their plum posts, for instance? Not many)

Yes, I think the claims of woodenness are mostly from people who do not understand (or who are heavily invested in not understanding) that Starmer doesn't really benefit from doing anything right now, so a risk-averse strategy makes a lot of sense for him.

That's an approach with a time limit (at the very least, the announcement of the results, but probably before then) but one of the problems with Very Online politics discourse is that it forgets the slowness of politics most of the time.

[CumbrianLefty]

On that tangent, Nandy's utterly bizarre "SEND IN THE TANKS!!" comments about Scotland haven't been forgotten by all of us either. And she has continued a pretty hardline stance on the topic since (whilst both RLB and Starmer have said an SNP majority in the next Holyrood election might be a strong argument for another independence vote)

Still not a single Scottish CLP nomination for her, is it? Given that - as is well known - the ScotLab rump isn't exactly a hotbed of leftism, that really does speak for itself.

[DaWN]

A strong line on the SNP is necessary as a Labour government requires an SLab revival and an SLab revival requires an SNP collapse. What shouldn't be done is conflating the SNP with Scottish independence - Labour needs to walk a thin line in order to win over both soft nationalists and unionist tactical votes (for which Nandy's approach wasn't the right one obviously).

I think SLab can do it, provided they have a strong, competent leader-


Oh wait. Never mind.

[Former President tack50]

Given how Scotland votes based on independence, as long as the unionist vote is divided and the separatist vote is united into a single party, the SNP will just win landslide after landslide. Only way to stop this is either a big unionist Tory-Labour-Lib Dem election deal (never happening) or an SNP splitter of some sort gaining traction (very unlikely I suppose)

In the mean time, Scottish Labour's plan should not be to become a flip flopping "neutral" party on independence, that will lose them whatever votes they have left to the Liberal Democrats. Why would you vote Labour if you are a Scottish Unionist then?

Scottish Labour should become the voice of all the left wing unionists in Scotland but that is it. I don't know if Nandy's hardline approach is the correct one o a more concilliatory one is better (how would a compromise even look like?); but Scottish Labour should still remain a clearly unionist party

[CumbrianLefty]

Well some of us see no contradiction to still being a "unionist" party and saying that it is ultimately up to the Scottish people themselves, and Labour would not stand in the way of a genuine desire for independence.

The sort of unthinking bone headed militant unionism espoused by the likes of Ian Murray is not going to bring the central belt back within reach for Labour any time soon (not least because in most places outside Edinburgh S, people that way inclined have a more obvious outlet with the Scottish Tories)

[EastAnglianLefty]

The results of the Labour selection ballot for the West Midlands mayoral candidate have just been announced and Liam Byrne has won. There's been no official breakdown as yet, but the rumour is that he was close to victory on the first ballot, with Pete Lowe second and Salma Yacoob in third.

This is being spun as a victory for the party's right and hence as encouraging news for Starmer. Which is probably broadly true, but still an oversimplification - Byrne had the endorsement of McDonnell and was the best known candidate (which tends to matter a lot in these sort of selections); Lowe's politics are basically Corbynite but his support base was the trade union left/the less rabid bits of the Corbyn coalition (UNISON etc.); Yacoob had UNITE's endorsement and a lot of backing from the online left, but would have been a weak candidate even if she hadn't stood against Labour candidates on multiple occasions (including 2017) and been involved in several high-profile scandals.

What impact this will have upon the mayoral race is unclear. On the one hand, Byrne is more competent than Sion Simon, but this is a quality he shares with many sedimentary rocks. On the other hand, selecting a candidate from Birmingham when the bulk of the electorate have a complicated relationship with that city didn't work last time and I'm not sure it will this time either.

[CumbrianLefty]

I mean, Labour's campaign for that post last time genuinely ranks amongst its worst ever anywhere.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

I mean, Labour's campaign for that post last time genuinely ranks amongst its worst ever anywhere.

Former wine critic for The Spectator unless my memory is making up malicious jokes (which is possible).

[Oryxslayer]

I think Nandy's comments are best understood when we consider the goal of her campaign and her targeted demographic if she wins. The unspoken question right now about Scottish Independence is what will the SNP or their voters do when BoJo tells them that Westminster will never approve IndyRef2 while he is in office. If one of the major Scottish players does something rash out of emotions that threatens the integrity of the Union, the Tories would love launch a Catalan style crackdown on the region. This whole strategy would further polarize Scottish voters (locking in Unonist support) but it would also reactivate that sense of English/British nationalism which powered Boris's majority. Boris would love to make Unity at any cost, like in Spain, a core tenant of both his platform and the nationalist ideal imagined by his voters.

Nandy in this regard seems well in touch with her northern 'towns' and the voters she would try to attract back. Nationalism, Nostalgia, and Identity are powerful motivators with these communities, which is why BoJo punched deep into Labour territory.

[CumbrianLefty]

I'm not at all convinced that English voters (even in these now almost mythologised "red wall" seats) are gung ho for tanks on the streets of Glasgow tbh. This looks like a rather lazy and stereotyped reading of a much more complex reality. It might also be recalled that British involvement in the NI conflict was rarely if ever *that* popular. And tbh Nandy's response wasn't about that really, more that (like a depressing number of English Labour MPs) she doesn't really understand Scotland or what is driving things there.

In a way this actually illustrates the possible Tory problems going forward, too; there are ways they can try and build on the impulses that caused their gains in December - but none are likely to equal the simple, visceral but also potentially relatively *cost-free* appeal of "GET BREXIT DONE". Polls consistently show English voters are OK with Scottish independence *if* Scots clearly want it, and other possible avenues like real instead of (largely) symbolic baiting of brown people/immigrants are also problematic. Most culture wars of that type - with REAL stuff at stake - will be hard fought on *both* sides, and what if the Tories lose them? Our notoriously lazy and risk-averse PM might easily shy away from all that.

[Blair]

The results of the Labour selection ballot for the West Midlands mayoral candidate have just been announced and Liam Byrne has won. There's been no official breakdown as yet, but the rumour is that he was close to victory on the first ballot, with Pete Lowe second and Salma Yacoob in third.

This is being spun as a victory for the party's right and hence as encouraging news for Starmer. Which is probably broadly true, but still an oversimplification - Byrne had the endorsement of McDonnell and was the best known candidate (which tends to matter a lot in these sort of selections); Lowe's politics are basically Corbynite but his support base was the trade union left/the less rabid bits of the Corbyn coalition (UNISON etc.); Yacoob had UNITE's endorsement and a lot of backing from the online left, but would have been a weak candidate even if she hadn't stood against Labour candidates on multiple occasions (including 2017) and been involved in several high-profile scandals.

What impact this will have upon the mayoral race is unclear. On the one hand, Byrne is more competent than Sion Simon, but this is a quality he shares with many sedimentary rocks. On the other hand, selecting a candidate from Birmingham when the bulk of the electorate have a complicated relationship with that city didn't work last time and I'm not sure it will this time either.

Besides this race is so far reconfirming my theory of internal labour races; a competent ex-blairite minister centre-left mainstream candidate can win if they have A.) Union Backing B.) No Baggage C.) A weak left candidate

And finally there's a huge difference between the labour activists that people perceive as being the membership & the actual 500K+ of members.

[Blair]

FWIW the Metro Mayor selection reveals both the absolute cruelty & shocking incompetence of some of those at the top of the party; a culture of 'well she's part of the movement isn't she' allowed Labour to shortlist a candidate who not only ran against Labour in 2017 (when JC was on the ballot) but someone who ran a vicious campaign against a Labour MP Naz Shah- Naz Shah wrote to the NEC and begged them not to let Yacoob be a candidate... but of course they did. 

On top of this Yacoob in the past consistently ran, organised and spoke for RESPECT- a rump hard-left party associated with George Galloway.

The most baffling thing is that Yacoob was clearly an extremely weak candidate; her numerous comments over the years made Jeremy Corbyn look extremely mild & she'd have lost on arrival to Street. You had a candidate on the left in Peter Lowe & frankly if you wanted a BAME LEFT candidate on the shortlist there's a whole host of people you could have picked over her.

The Party should have decided the candidate last summer; iirc Sadiq had 8 months after winning the Labour Party and that was a sweet spot in terms of allowing him to bed in.

I expect Street will win; he's been relatively popular & the Labour machine is hardly in great shape in the region.   

[CumbrianLefty]

Have to say, allowing Yaqoob to be a candidate (arguably, even letting her be in the party so soon after 2017) was the sort of act of petty factionalism more associated with the "never Corbyn" right in recent years.

Still, the resultant split left vote made it easy for Byrne to win - so arguably poetic justice (though I did note that endorsement for him from McDonnell - wonder what that was all about)

[Filuwaúrdjan]

CLP nominations updates...

Starmer 201
Long Bailey 96
Nandy 40
Thornberry 13

Rayner 200
Butler 49
Burgon 39
Murray 37
Allin-Khan 27

Murray has now made the ballot. Allin-Khan needs six more nominations to do so.

Affiliates

a) Trade Unions

Starmer: Unison, USDAW, Musicians Union, Community
Long Bailey: Unite, CWU, FBU, BFAWU
Nandy: GMB, NUM

Rayner: Unison, GMB, USDAW, CWU, Community, NUM
Burgon: Unite, FBU, BFAWU
Allin-Khan: MU

b) Socialist Societies

Starmer: SERA, SHA, Labour Movement for Europe, Labour Business
Nandy: Chinese for Labour
Not Nominating: Fabian Society, LGBT Labour

Rayner: SHA, Labour Business
Allin-Khan: Labour Campaign for International Development
Butler: Chinese for Labour
Murray: Labour Movement for Europe
Not Nominating: Fabian Society, LGBT Labour

[CumbrianLefty]

Looking like Thornberry could be the only one to be weeded out at this stage.

(involuntarily anyway, if you count Phillips)

[Statilius the Epicurean]

Ugh. I really want to like Nandy, but all of the policies she comes out with are gimmicky nonsense sh**t like

https://twitter.com/Kate_M_Proctor/status/1225368691698696192?s=20

I dunno. It's like she's the most skilled politician in the running by far but in substance there seems to be no there there. Perhaps giving her some slack it's hard to announce new policies during a leadership run but still. Ugh.

[DaWN]

Ugh. I really want to like Nandy, but all of the policies she comes out with are gimmicky nonsense sh**t like

https://twitter.com/Kate_M_Proctor/status/1225368691698696192?s=20

I dunno. It's like she's the most skilled politician in the running by far but in substance there seems to be no there there. Perhaps giving her some slack it's hard to announce new policies during a leadership run but still. Ugh.

TOWNS

[CumbrianLefty]

In many of the "red wall" seats that were lost or nearly lost in December, the local Labour-run councils are regarded as ineffective depoliticised administrators at best and cynically self-aggrandizing - if not outright corrupt - at worst.

To see Nandy and (to a somewhat lesser degree) Starmer bigging these mediocrities up for fairly transparent factional purposes is somewhat depressing, even if unsurprising.

[Democratic Hawk]

Seems to be that RBL is not fairing too well among 'moderate' second preferences. For example:

Islington North: RBL got 125 votes to 80 for KS, who pips her to the post by 138 votes to 135.

City of Durham, my constituency, RBL got 37 votes to 23 for LN, who wins 52 to 41.

Should point out that in Durham most speakers supported RBL and RB, for deputy, but a silent more moderate majority prevailed

[CumbrianLefty]

Allin-Khan made the deputy leadership ballot yesterday, which means that only Thornberry of all the declared contenders is still short of the necessary nominations. She picked up a few CLPs yesterday but it may be too little too late with the deadline coming this Friday.