Labour leadership contest 2020

Posted on
Page
of 23
  • Long-Bailey was hopeless, Nandy was good

  • Nandy is very good in the media, as much I want to be ruthlessly pragmatic, some of her views are a little counter-intuitive to my lefty instincts.

    I dont mind RLB, but she really needs to come up with a better line than we will just change the message.

  • Pissed off about the labyrinthine procedure that has seen the best two candidates (Thornberry and Lewis) kicked off the ballot. Off to the London Hustings tomorrow to see who to pick from those that remain. Not enthused. Hope I will be by tomorrow evening.

  • RLB supporting a second ref in Scotland is so silly. As if they're aren't other more important things to get on with.

  • Well, there does seem to be a belief in some sections of Labour that that's the only way of regaining more Labour seats in Scotland. I actually thought the same of the news that Long-Bailey had published a plan to unify the party; both sort-of party-internal issues, no doubt aimed at greater electoral success, and perhaps it's what you need to talk about in a contest to be party leader, but still feeling, to me as an outsider, a bit like navel-gazing.

    Anyway, it's all a little irrelevant; as soon as the Tories put the gerrymandering proposals in the Boundary Review into practice, which they will surely do soon now they have a large majority, Labour will be frozen out of power for the foreseeable future.

  • Well that was surprising. Went to the London hustings with a very open mind.

    In the leadership hustings, I was impressed most of all by Lisa Nandy, something I really did not expect. My current ranking is Nandy, RLB and then Starmer.

    In the deputy leadership, anyone of four would be excellent but Richard Burgon stood out from among them. Didn’t expect that either. Dawn Butler started well but lost it and her cool on antisemitism. Rosena Allin Khan was good but possibly too inexperienced and maybe better suited to another role. Angela Rayner was good and solid but not the force I was expecting. Murray? No.

    A worthwhile way to spend a wet Sunday.

  • I've had texts from all the contenders asking for my voting intentions, how does that work?

  • I've had texts from Lisa Nandy (who I signed up to follow) RLB and Rosena Allin-Khan (who I didn't). How did the latter two get my number? I think there must be a GDPR infringement somewhere there.

  • i got a surveymonkey link. that doesn't seem secure / safe / useful.

    anyone else get this?

    https://www.surveymonkey.co.uk/r/FH2VJN3­

  • Are you a labour member?

  • Also have had all the texts. Fairly annoying and I only signed up for Nandy.

    Maybe they all get access to the Labour membership data

  • I’ve had texts from Starmer, RLB and Angela Rayner. All within 24 hours. I’m assuming I agreed to this sort of contact when I joined.

  • All candidates can buy access to the member data for 6k.

  • And all candidates have signed the landmine pledgecard. A purity spiral row then erupts. Why do politicians on the left keep stepping on poltical landmines. The courts are going to end up defining the issue and gave started too because all can do is sign a pledgecard. This does not bode well for avoiding future rows take taking the lead rather than letting others take the lead and instead start a purity war.

    My wife has had the same texts. She replied no to one of them. Her favoured candidate has not had a reply.

  • are you talking about the BoD pledges here? I agree that this has some worrying implications but do you think it would have been politically expedient to not sign it? Genuine question and don't want to dig up the whole debate here

  • I am not mentioning which pledge because I dont want to start the same poltical war here. BoD pledges is not what I was referring to.

    The whole pledge card thing irks me. It's one group or another trying to seize the party and exclude some. It happens on so many issues. Essentially those over there are not pure enough to be members of this party. It matters little how well meaning the pledges are the fact they exist is the problem. It very labour and it is labour poltical culture that stops me voting labour not its policy mix. Simply I dont like being told what to think I can do that for myself. I am not implying that labour supporter dont think for themsleves. It just that labour culture makes me feel like I shouldn't.

    It also sad that I have to add caveats to stop people getting the wrong end of the stick. The above user did it by assuming I might have meant one particular thing. Everything I have seen is the embedding of the existing culture and my vote will not be for labour unless the parties culture starts to change.

    Kier to his credit has started mention a federal uk. While that's something I support it's going to take more than kier saying it for it to become reality or me vote labour.

  • I am not mentioning which pledge because I dont want to start the same poltical war here. BoD pledges is not what I was referring to.

    The whole pledge card thing irks me. It's one group or another trying to seize the party and exclude some. It happens on so many issues. Essentially those over there are not pure enough to be members of this party. It matters little how well meaning the pledges are the fact they exist is the problem. It very labour and it is labour poltical culture that stops me voting labour not its policy mix. Simply I dont like being told what to think I can do that for myself. I am not implying that labour supporter dont think for themsleves. It just that labour culture makes me feel like I shouldn't.

    It also sad that I have to add caveats to stop people getting the wrong end of the stick. This is other problem not being able to understand others point of view. The above user did it by assuming I might have meant one particular thing. Everything I have seen is the embedding of the existing culture and my vote will not be for labour unless the parties culture starts to change.

    Kier to his credit has started mention a federal uk. While that's something I support it's going to take more than kier saying it for it to become reality.

  • Thoughts on the Channel 4 debate …

    Disappointing, standard-politician ‘pressure on social media companies’ answers from Starmer and RLB. Nandy was more insightful - she brought up access to mental health services (something that could possibly be improved).

    RLB and Starmer both either fumbled or refused to answer questions. Nandy seemed well within her comfort zone.

    Not much of substance was discussed.

    A point of difference between Starmer and RLB is on anti-semitism cases. RLB choses independence from leadership. Starmer chose direct leadership.

  • Very torn between Starmer and Nandy. Likely Nandy 1st, Starmer 2nd for me

  • Nandy speaks well, but dunno. Something about her that I'm not sure on and need to consider what that is.

    Starmer. Not really looking like a Prime Minister to me, as he's not really showing a vision for the country outside of "I'll unite the party" and answered a lot by rephrasing the question back at people. Do like the way he doesn't put up with rubbish questions, but I reckon Boris will give him the runaround quite easily. Possibly a bad night, as he's got stuff in the background too.

    Long-Bailey. Probably the best showing of the three for me last night. She clearly played cautious with a few answers, but generally felt she's the best showing. Suspect she may do well against Boris.

  • I went into Sunday's hustings with Nandy as third choice. I cam out with her well into the lead.

    While listening, I appreciated that all the candidates were, pretty much saying the same thing on policy. I could accept their approach and would support whichever one won. The question then became , which one presented the best opportunity for a serious challenge at a GE in four years time. Nandy impressed as someone who would deliver a generational shift and bring freshness to a campaign. She would grow into the role.

    None of the candidates are perfect but I think she presents the best chance.

  • I am becoming increasingly bemused by Starmer's refusal to disclose who is funding his campaign. One estimate, which one hopes is an exaggeration, is that he has spent £1 million so far, making it the most expensive internal campaign in British political history. OK, the Labour party have four or five times the number of members of the next largest political party and a longer and more democratic means of selecting a leader, so a campaign is likely to be more expensive than the Tory one, but why can't he just say where his money is coming from?

    Until he does, he has dropped down to third in my selection.

  • Have Nandy and Long-Bailey been asked and answered fully? Honest question - I don't know the answer

  • Long-Baileys published a breakdown of her backers over £1500:

    https://rebeccaforleader.org/donorlist

    Good move. Up to the others to follow, really.

    Wasn't sure what to do with my Keir poster? Tried giving to my mum, but she wasn't interested.

  • Post a reply
    • Bold
    • Italics
    • Link
    • Image
    • List
    • Quote
    • code
    • Preview
About

Labour leadership contest 2020

Posted by Avatar for dst2 @dst2

Actions