Harman's Labour 'rebellion'
 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-33608826

Oh well, they have 5 years to sort it all out... :)

Re: Harman's Labour 'rebellion'
 

I find myself in agreement with David Blunkett:
Whatever next?! :shocked: :D

Re: Harman's Labour 'rebellion'
 

As someone amusingly said - they're having a leadership crisis without a leader....

Re: Harman's Labour 'rebellion'
 

Given the dubious quality of the candidates, I don't imagine it'll be the last either. :D

Re: Harman's Labour 'rebellion'
 

Although Harriet Harman sent her children to a school outside the catchment area whilst preaching to other parents that they should follow the rules, she seems to be the Labour politician with the grown up and realistic attitude.

The Labour Party could fare a lot worse without her leadership. Not that it matters at the moment to anyone but those scrabbling to hang on to their opposition benefits.

Re: Harman's Labour 'rebellion'
 

A party that is sadly rudderless from top to bottom currently.

Re: Harman's Labour 'rebellion'
 

Rudderless and clueless.

Re: Harman's Labour 'rebellion'
 

You can expect them to be until they get a leader. To be honest I think Harman did the sensible thing. She is refusing to commit Labour to anything during her time there and let the next leader position for party where they think best. Voting for would enrage the base and voting against would allow the Tories to portray them as welfare fans.

Let's not pretend Osborne isn't setting traps for them either. The budget on reflection will impact poorer families more than the rest and there is a mixture of good benefit reductions and more controversial ones.

Re: Harman's Labour 'rebellion'
 

Linky

Sharp left turn into the wilderness ahead. :)

Re: Harman's Labour 'rebellion'
 

Well, if it turns out that way, that says all there is to say about the calibre of the other candidates and the deep seated denial rooted within the party.

Re: Harman's Labour 'rebellion'
 

Got to love their "logic", ie people voted Conservative and UKIP because Labour weren't Left wing enough.:confused:

Even though they are not in power in Westminster, they are in power in Councils up and down the country.

Re: Harman's Labour 'rebellion'
 

Utter shambles. It seems, once again, that they are the only ones who can't foresee the impending train wreck.

Re: Harman's Labour 'rebellion'
 

Wiki

History has a habit of repeating itself.

Re: Harman's Labour 'rebellion'
 

Same old Labour, same old mistakes...

Re: Harman's Labour 'rebellion'
 

this is not the labour party that i knew and supported when i came into working for a living some 50 odd years ago , as i find it hard to differ them from the Tories !

Re: Harman's Labour 'rebellion'
 

We need a Labour Leader that is strong enough to take on The Tories. And l have never heard of Corbyn.

My vote would go to Burnham. We have to have a leader that is strong enough to stand up against Cameron and Osborne.

What Osborne is doing at the moment is appalling. I think what is so annoying is that MPs are putting in silly expense claims, they wages have been INCREASED and yet Osborne is still making cuts.

We need a Labour leader will take them on.

What we could do is have an MP with some bottle, that MPs who is the youngest MP in history, she told the government what she really felt like.

That's what we need

Re: Harman's Labour 'rebellion'
 

No, that's what you want. What we need is Corbyn to be elected leader and make Labour unelectable for at least two decades.

Looks like we'll get that. :)

Re: Harman's Labour 'rebellion'
 

You need a strong opposition otherwise the Tories will just run riot without ever being held to account. It's not like football teams where you just support your side no matter what. At least for those of us who aren't active members of a particular party.

Daniel Hannan, a Tory MEP, gives such an argument here:

http://www.conservativehome.com/thec...ervatives.html

Personally I like the idea that Corbyn will move Labour so far left that the centrists break away and form their own party, maybe with the Liberal Democrats or at least the Orange Book Lib Dems, and this new centre-left party becomes the new opposition freed of the more socialist aspects of Labour and the Unions.

Re: Harman's Labour 'rebellion'
 

That would be a positive result IMHO.

Re: Harman's Labour 'rebellion'
 

The Social Democrats were supposed to be that weren't they and look how that ended... :erm: ;)

Re: Harman's Labour 'rebellion'
 

True also the Tories are relatively moderate anyway so it's not quite clear how they could position themselves to be different enough. I think that while the SDP didn't quite work New Labour showed that there is room for that kind of left-wing party (or 'Red Tories' as their critics dismiss them as) and if Old Labour won't provide it then maybe the new party could?

It's difficult though because the conventional left/right axis isn't there anymore imo. In England it seems to come down to minor quibbles over the exact amount of public spending that we should make but other than that are there any major dividing lines in English politics? No one is threatening the concept of the NHS seriously. No one really wants to raise taxes to a radical degree. No one cares too much about military spending. Education doesn't seem to cause division. The EU causes issues but there will be a referendum on that and i don't think it moves many votes.

I think the biggest issue is Scottish Nationalism and actually Corbyn might actually help us there. I think it would be interesting to see how the SNP deal with Labour coming at them from the left. There is a big difference between the SNP's rhetoric and their policies. They might find themselves unstuck if they lost the perception of being the left-wing heroes of Scotland.

Maybe Labour's best hope is to elect a moderate and hope the Tories lose the election themselves. That's pretty much how the Tories got in anyway. We just seem to elect parties on competence rather than ideology....

Re: Harman's Labour 'rebellion'
 

That's what happened in 1997 when we were all hacked off with sleazy Tories and accordingly voted for 'whiter than white' Bliar who promised to be better. Maybe we have to get used to the idea that elections are lost rather than won. As much as I detest Labour, I also hate the idea that another party might be able to stay in power simply because there's no credible opposition.

Re: Harman's Labour 'rebellion'
 

Yes parties of all colours can get very arrogant when they are in power too long and get drunk with power and stop listening.

Re: Harman's Labour 'rebellion'
 

:clap:

---------- Post added at 21:37 ---------- Previous post was at 21:20 ----------

That idiot? Read this
The man is an opportunist lightweight :shrug:

Re: Harman's Labour 'rebellion'
 

It's not just Blair promising to be better though it was the fact he made Labour electable by ditching the fringe wackiness that characterised his party until that point. Too many in Labour seem to value ideological purity over pragmatism and hence seem content to lose elections on their terms than win elections by compromising with the electorate.

It's telling that Kendell, by saying they need to address some of the reasons they lost, is dismissed as a 'Tory'. It's equally telling that 'Tory' is the worst epithet they can imagine. They don't seem to understand a large amount of the electorate don't really feel too strongly about either party so shouting 'TORY!!!!' won't convince them.

It's nuts.

Re: Harman's Labour 'rebellion'
 

Idiots appeal to idiots... :D

Re: Harman's Labour 'rebellion'
 

I don't get him. He seems to have no presence at all. His campaign so far seems to be to tell everyone who'll listen that he is from the north and likes football. He isn't part of the Westminster bubble you see, because he is from the North. When he goes up North to watch football he speaks to ordinary northerners (you can tell they're northerns cos they're plain speaking and like football) and relates to their concerns because he grew up in the North (watching football) and so isn't part of the Westminster bubble like ordinary folk back up North. :dozey:

In case you don't understand his appeal, it's the fact he is from the North by the way.

Re: Harman's Labour 'rebellion'
 

Is he from the north then? :shrug:

He must have a pet ferret... :D

---------- Post added at 21:58 ---------- Previous post was at 21:57 ----------

I can't see the Lib Dems getting drunk with power anytime soon :)

Re: Harman's Labour 'rebellion'
 

I laughed out loud:
link:rofl:

Re: Harman's Labour 'rebellion'
 

Well, being a moron, she's in very good company in the Labour party. I dare say they're hoping to be as radical and successful as Syriza in Greece, snatching a terrible outcome from a bad one... :D

Re: Harman's Labour 'rebellion'
 

If you ask me I think a lot of people have given up on 'politics'
even the Labour party.
just expect the worst and you'll be ok. that's the way it is now anyway. so the only real reason why the Labour party is still around is to be in a job where they can have expenses and be a bit posh.

Dave has destroyed politics. the fat slaphead must have been bullied at University or something.

Re: Harman's Labour 'rebellion'
 

Nigel from Kent caught them all out:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-33629623

Corbyn ought to join the Lib Dems I reckon.

:D

Re: Harman's Labour 'rebellion'
 

:tu:

Re: Harman's Labour 'rebellion'
 

Not that I'm a huge fan of Cameron (even though I voted conservative), I don't think that you can really say that he has "destroyed politics". Labour should take some of the blame as well :shrug:

Re: Harman's Labour 'rebellion'
 

That post says so much about you....;)

Re: Harman's Labour 'rebellion'
 

He has a problem grasping reality. The fantasy world he occupies feels so much safer. It's a form a comfort blanket really... :)

Re: Harman's Labour 'rebellion'
 

Linky

It's a strange world these people inhabit. Just need enough of the party to believe it.:D

Re: Harman's Labour 'rebellion'
 

Yes. it tells you I'm not like you :)

---------- Post added at 18:14 ---------- Previous post was at 18:13 ----------

What he said.

Re: Harman's Labour 'rebellion'
 

https://www.cableforum.co.uk/images/...2015/07/12.jpg

Re: Harman's Labour 'rebellion'
 

Linky

Go Jezzer! :D

Re: Harman's Labour 'rebellion'
 

Would that be this John Mills:

http://www.theguardian.com/politics/...nor-john-mills

Maybe his judgment is a tad suspect at times...

Re: Harman's Labour 'rebellion'
 

Sunday Times reporting Harman is being urged to suspend the campaign due a 'hard-left' infiltration causing a membership surge in the last few weeks.

Re: Harman's Labour 'rebellion'
 

I reckon it's a Tory infiltration... :D

Re: Harman's Labour 'rebellion'
 

This is the way it should be though. If Labour go further left, which is where they should be, it gives a clear choice and if the country agrees they'll vote for them.

What we don't want is a return to the Blair days of Tory Light Labour where the parties were undistiguishable.

Re: Harman's Labour 'rebellion'
 

I'd far rather have a left leaning party which is open and honest about what it intends that a lying bunch of hypocrites who pretend to be one thing then do the opposite. I don't think we'll ever get that though.

Re: Harman's Labour 'rebellion'
 

I agree. Let Stormin' Corbyn have his day; at least he is a principled leftie and not a careerist fake.

Re: Harman's Labour 'rebellion'
 

Me too - more power to Corbyn! Just watch the fame go to his head...

Re: Harman's Labour 'rebellion'
 

Better to have someone who is real and has principles rather then the fake phonies we have had lately.

Re: Harman's Labour 'rebellion'
 

Even if they make the party they're supposed to be serving unelectable?

Re: Harman's Labour 'rebellion'
 

Well that's not been tested with him so we will have to find out in 5 years time whether he is electable or not.:)

Re: Harman's Labour 'rebellion'
 

I think Michael Foot's final 'contribution' to Labour might be an indication. In any event having principles isn't enough.

Re: Harman's Labour 'rebellion'
 

Foot 2.0

'nuf said.

Re: Harman's Labour 'rebellion'
 

I can't see how he could possibly win. Some of this ideas may end up being popular but he'll lack fiscal credibility, be perceived as too extreme and generally not PM material IMO. Much like Miliband.

The only way I can see it happening is if we're underestimating the appeal of a different message to that which has been provided over the last 15-20 years. Maybe it is the case that since Blair we all assume that people want centrist Governments that make small incremental changes and are judged on competency rather than policy. I mean the last election really was about that wasn't it? There wasn't too much difference between the parties and now even Osbourne is aping some of the Labour policies, such as the living wage, which was deemed as rampant socialism by Labour's critics prior to the election. For their part Labour mirrored Osbourne's stance on eliminating the deficit and running a balanced budget where possible!

The only people who got passionate about this minor differences were hyper-patisans who tried to claim it amounted to the world of difference. The Tories would chuck the dying onto the streets whereas Labour would rob them then their dead according to them. Normal people didn't care.

Maybe Corbyn will succeed by offering a genuine difference and benefit from the 'Farage' effect where people believe what he is saying. I doubt it will work though.

His supporters are falling for the same trap they did during the Election. All their friends, Twitter and Facebook love him ergo the whole nation loves him. After all who isn't on Twitter and Facebook talking about politics 24/7?

Re: Harman's Labour 'rebellion'
 

Those on the further reaches of the left tend to be absolutely vile online in my experience.

In my experience some are tetchy, middle class, obsessively PC social justice warriors who don't even attempt to engage in reasoned debate but run their spiel about why every viewpoint apart from their own is wrong, then run away to their safe place.

Others are also tetchy and obsessively PC, but add to that the extra charm of throwing hateful bile rather than just running a miniature manifesto at you. Then having thrown that bile will leave with some insult about how a person isn't worth speaking to.

What both have in common is their utter refusal to engage with anyone with a viewpoint that doesn't match their own, a disdain for basic liberties such as freedom of speech, deeming it far less valuable than their own 'right' to not be offended or challenged, and a strong preference for the prevailing group think.

Regrettably this point of view seems rather common in younger generations especially. Previously that's where free thinkers were; now it's where the group think, political correctness and an entitlement to not be challenged are.

Re: Harman's Labour 'rebellion'
 

Hey totally unrealistic fantasyland economics have worked pretty well for the SNP up here.

Re: Harman's Labour 'rebellion'
 

I agree. I have seen some of them on my Twitter feed and it's not nice. At the moment it's about the expulsion of the Blairites (read: moderates) if they win the leadership of the Labour party. It's the type of person for whom 'Tory' is the worst epithet they can award someone. At no point does it occur to any of them then they should be expanding the Labour electorate rather than diminishing it until it's just them and their little club. :rolleyes:

The whole idea of the social justice warriors and safe spaces is a bizarre internet subculture that exists only online or in some Universities. Most of the time online however they seek out the other idiots on the other side of the debate (i.e MRAs) and they all then fight an pointless battle than no one can relate too (gamergate) so they're more an interesting little group than a problem with society.

Also let's not pretend it's a problem just with the left either. The equivalent on the right are the Britain First memes that get spread around or even just the plain racist, xenophobic and misogynistic comments than you can find.

The internet just amplifies the fringes.

Re: Harman's Labour 'rebellion'
 

All of which explains why some of stay clear of social media and are untroubled by the nonsense which infests it.

---------- Post added at 09:35 ---------- Previous post was at 09:31 ----------

Had they got their way at the referendum, those fantasyland figures would by now be focusing a lot of minds amongst those who naively bought into all the rhetoric. Good referendum to lose methinks...

Re: Harman's Labour 'rebellion'
 

Linky

Bet that sticks in Andy Burnham's craw. He would have been counting on the support of NHS Unions as his trump card. Stafford Hospital Karma?

Re: Harman's Labour 'rebellion'
 

Linky

Looks like Jezzer's got it in the bag. :)

Re: Harman's Labour 'rebellion'
 

Good. If it takes Labour tearing itself to pieces and being reborn to get effective opposition in place so be it.

Other than those with serious persecution complexes relating to Labour I doubt that anyone is happy with the current situation.

Effective government needs effective opposition.

Re: Harman's Labour 'rebellion'
 

What he said...

Re: Harman's Labour 'rebellion'
 

Agreed.

I think that the reason Corbyn is doing so well in the leadership contest is that he is the only candidate I've seen that is not spouting the same Tory-Lite stuff that Tony Blair introduced, and Gordon Brown and Ed Milliband just blindly followed.

I think a lot of the Labour membership realise that that is not going to work with the electorate, as the Tories have done a good job of blaming the previous administration for the state of the economy.

Regardless of the party on power, I believe you are right. Our system of government works best if there is an effective opposition. Unfortunately, in their current state, neither the Liberal Democrats nor Labour are offering this.

Re: Harman's Labour 'rebellion'
 

If Corbyn turns his party away from the obsession with slogans he'll be doing us all a favour. I'm sick and tired of hearing stuff like 'flatlining' and 'cost of living crisis' repeated ad nauseam until the next one comes along...

Interestingly, I've lost count of how often I've heard trade union representatives and members referring to 'work/life balance' when trying to justify the current tube strikes in London. It's as if a message has been sent down from upon high to utter it as often as possible even if someone's just asking the time of day. It just sounds so insincere...

Re: Harman's Labour 'rebellion'
 

I still can't fathom why tube drivers are so well paid :erm:

Re: Harman's Labour 'rebellion'
 

because they do a great job keeping ruddy cyclists off the road;)

Re: Harman's Labour 'rebellion'
 

Leverage. When the system is fully automated like Singapore, and it will happen, then tube driver salary will be zilch. They'll be as obsolete as deep pit miners. Remember how they hastened the closure of the coal industry? Strike, strike, strike. Oh! No job.

Mind you the guy who runs the computer that runs the tube will be very handsomely rewarded.

Re: Harman's Labour 'rebellion'
 

Its going to take some considerable time to fully automate the Underground and its likely only so much will be done in the coming years.

Re: Harman's Labour 'rebellion'
 

It's all very reminiscent of the 'print' before the days of Eddie Shah and Wapping. These unions will go the same way if they carry on...

Re: Harman's Labour 'rebellion'
 

I'm equally tired of hearing 'Long-term economic plan' but it is what it is and they all do it.

Corbyn is more interesting in that he doesn't stick to the buzzwords. You watch interviews with politicians of all colours, especially Labour though, reciting the same talking points over and over again and answering every question with those talking points even when they are nothing to do with the question.

Corbyn is far more error-prone and far less likely to play it safe to try and avoid doing anything 'wrong'.

Which is nice. Labour playing so safe is pointless. We currently have Her Majesty's Government and Her Majesty's Abstainers.

Talking of all of this look at this nonsense. I was rather hoping that Labour would reform themselves into a force for democracy and localism, veering away from their traditional 'top down' ways. Sadly not, they seem scared of the answer democracy may give so are trying to pervert it.

No wonder they are so into the EU. They appear to be taking lessons in disdain for democracy from it.

They made the decision to allow people to vote for a one-off payment of £3. The unforeseen consequences really weren't that had to foresee.

Re: Harman's Labour 'rebellion'
 

I think it's clear they screwed up the supporters idea but I think they're entitled to vet people to ensure that only people with a genuine desire to see Labour do well should be allowed to vote. It's standard for political parties to expel people who are members of another party and even the supporters section has a disclaimer that you 'must support the values of the Labour party and are not a member of any organisation that opposes it'.

Mark Steel seems weird unless he is a member of the Green Party but I guess Labour rejected him because of his support for them? That probably goes too far and that needs to be kept an eye on. If they do rig the vote then the fallout will be extreme.

The idea itself is good in principle but this probably shows why parties have different methods of electing a leader.

Corbyn should be a worry by the way. He seems genuine but he has a lot of support for the more unsavoury parts of the left. They are not liberals.

Re: Harman's Labour 'rebellion'
 

Neither are a good part of the Labour party as a whole, which is unfortunate as there is in my opinion room for more liberal attitudes in UK politics.

Re: Harman's Labour 'rebellion'
 

True.

Also the thing about the 'Blairites' was that they were willing to compromise and attempt to win support from non-traditional Labour voters. The Corbyn people view half of their own party with contempt and moderate voters along with them. It will be all ideological purity. Look at the treatment Kendell is getting. In about a month these people could be in charge of the opposition. It's insane.

Re: Harman's Labour 'rebellion'
 

Heathen :)

And I bet he rides a bike to work :D.

Re: Harman's Labour 'rebellion'
 

This whole leadership contest betrays what a total shambles Labour is. Leading candidates being eclipsed by a token political dinosaur who's already suffering from temporary memory loss when confronted with some facts about the company he's kept in the not too distant past.

http://news.sky.com/story/1538398/co...nned-extremist

Having come up with a particularly stupid voting system which was always going to be open to abuse, now letters are being sent out to all sorts of Labour supporters telling them they can't vote, simply because the party's definition of democracy doesn't include getting a result they clearly don't want in the form of Corbyn.
They've taken lessons from the EU clearly...

... and these people seriously want to be trusted to run the country again?? :rofl:

Now the kiss of death must be Russell Brand's endorsement surely... :D

Re: Harman's Labour 'rebellion'
 

Just rejoice as Labour tears itself to pieces. :)

Re: Harman's Labour 'rebellion'
 

Rejoice all you want. This isn't good for anyone. Corbyn has been associating with some very dodgy people and it's ridiculous this has allowed to have gotten this far. This is for the leader of the opposition and irrespective of how unelectable we assume someone to be that doesn't mean things can't change. The idea Corbyn could win this contest would have seemed outlandish a couple of months ago. The idea the SNP could win almost all the Scottish Parliamentary seats would have seemed outlandish a year ago.

Let's say there is another economic crisis and the confidence in the Tories plummets. After 5 years of their plan we're back where we started and then suddenly Corbyn's rhetoric appeals to voters. Things can change fast in politics and assumptions that they cannot have caught us out before.

If that happens then we have a Prime Minister who: Has proposed joint-ownership of the Falklands with Argentina, has welcomed anti-Semitic speakers and shared platforms with them and wants to leave NATO. Even without him being PM that is still a ridiculous person to have as leader of the opposition. Farage would have got rightly criticised if he had associated with some of the people Corbyn has.

Even aside from Corbyn only the most myopic of Tories wouldn't be worried about the dangers of a Government that isn't being held to account.

---------- Post added at 19:31 ---------- Previous post was at 19:28 ----------

They have screwed the supporter system up but it's worth noting how many of these 'supporters' were campaigning and even standing for other parties in May. Mark Steel for example supported the Greens, campaigned for them and helped raise money for them. One of the things they agree to when they join is that they support the principles and aims of the Labour Party and one of the party's key aims is to beat all the opposition - including the Greens and the Health Action Party.

Re: Harman's Labour 'rebellion'
 

Mark Steel is but one of hundreds of people who've been told the same thing. Exactly who is allowed to vote in this election and who's deciding that under what process? I hope Corbyn does win because it seems only that outcome will lead to Labour being a credible opposition, albeit after his outdated politics have caused the party to implode and become unelectable.

Re: Harman's Labour 'rebellion'
 

I don't think Corbyn will make Labour into a credible opposition. I think by definition a credible opposition needs to stand a chance of costing the Government their majority and frighten their MPs sitting in marginal seats. That causes the Government to take notice, makes their backbenchers nervous and more likely to rebel to save their own skins and ultimately forces concessions from them or even scuppers bills altogether.

An opposition without a snowballs chance of getting elected are confined to whining from the dispatch box and in TV studios without ever causing trouble to the Government.

As for the process of who is and who isn't allowed to vote there is an article here about what Labour are actually doing: http://www.newstatesman.com/politics...-jeremy-corbyn. In short they've screwed it up and they should really just let it be and accept the consequences but their intentions don't seem to be conspiracy but rather a belated attempt to fix a fatal flaw in their process. After all Labour had long, large fights to stop the militants from taking over the party during the 1980s and now, in one swoop, they've let them all in via the back door!

The supporter system seems to have been designed to dramatically increase the party's electorate to dilute the influence of the Unions but the problem is we don't have a tradition of open primaries in this country. Few people would be bothered about voting for the leader of a political party 5 years before the next election. So instead a highly political motivated minority have signed up with the intention of skewing the party towards their ideology. Let's face it the kind of people who obsess over the internal politics of a party aren't reflective of the wider population, they are campaigners and partisans.

So rather than marginalising the fringe element they've empowered them and instead marginalised the moderates. A very small part of the electorate are forcing one of the two potential parties of Governments into electorate wilderness and the moderates seem powerless to stop it. This is catastrophic for Labour and pretty bad for everyone else too.

In that context it's not unreasonable to think that Labour should vet the lists for the most obvious of entryists.

Re: Harman's Labour 'rebellion'
 

I wasn't suggesting Corbyn would - I was suggesting that him getting elected and the party imploding might then lead to something credible by way of opposition. ;)

Re: Harman's Labour 'rebellion'
 

Labour are set for a lot of years not in government, its shocking how fast they have fallen.

With an english population that is typically anti left wing and a right wing press, Labour are in for some bad years.

I am probably more left wing than right wing myself, but even with my limited intelligence I know a left wing leader is bad for the labour party. Out of all their candidates my MP liz kendall is probably the only one who can win an election, fresh face, blairite, female and with some right wing policies. Yet she is in 4th place.

Labour are in a tough place for sure, they need to go more left wing to win back scotland, but that will destroy them in england. The tories will be rejoicing for a while yet.

Re: Harman's Labour 'rebellion'
 

As long as a decent opposition emerges from the ashes absolutely.

I am pleased and somewhat surprised to say that I have not been purged. I guess my extensive work with our Labour councillors and MP ensured I passed the test.

---------- Post added at 10:31 ---------- Previous post was at 10:25 ----------

I would actually disagree. The Conservatives moved closer to Blair and have claimed that space in the centre-right. Why would anyone vote pretendy-Conservative when they can have something closer to the real thing?

Also, surely it's more important for parties to try and sell their vision to the electorate, rather than changing that vision in an attempt to get elected? What's the point in having a plurality of parties if the rest are all being blown about by public opinion and have no principles beyond to say whatever they think the electorate want to hear?

---------- Post added at 10:34 ---------- Previous post was at 10:31 ----------

I'm far from convinced the entire English population is anti-left wing. Just no-one has really tried to make that argument coherently, and people are too lazy to bother trying to find out. They'd far rather be spoon-fed by a press which, obviously, is going to have a right-wing bias, it's run by people with a right-wing bias.

A number of UKIP's policies were somewhat to the left and seemed to go down well.

The argument on the left is, sadly, dominated by a regressive group who want to impose their views on everyone else. They have contempt for progressive politics, democracy, and the rights of the individual. If a group were to come to prominence offering liberal social policies, essentially not behaving like the offence police and demanding we all adore the EU, alongside left-wing economics and a genuine respect for democracy close to the point of delivery who knows what'd happen?

Re: Harman's Labour 'rebellion'
 

I agree principles are important, and this is one reason I hate politics.

Policies get shaped on what is needed to win vs what is believed in.

However a left wing labour party will get nowhere, they would need to reeducate a population to believe in those policies and be up against most of the press. It might however bring a lib dem revival.

By the way I agree with lots of what corbyn has said, so my opinion is based on whats good for labour vs my political alignment.

Re: Harman's Labour 'rebellion'
 

Ah. I care far more about the country when it comes down to that. A 'social-democrat' opposition that abstain on welfare cuts get short shrift.

Re: Harman's Labour 'rebellion'
 

Even with a Corbyn leadership, Labour will still be the second biggest party next election, unless people go to UKIP. SNP can only gain a maximum of 59 seats, although is there a reason why they couldn't expand into England and Wales?

Re: Harman's Labour 'rebellion'
 

The hint might be in the name - Scottish Nationalist Party....

Re: Harman's Labour 'rebellion'
 

yes but if they teamed up with the Yorkshire nationalists etc ;)

The out come of the labour leadership is a bit irrelevant - they are out of power for a generation. Sad to say sometime you have to blame the electorate not politicians. Particularly the apathetic ones who don't vote but just complain why nothing changes. People are increasingly self centered and right wing - just the way society is going.

Hope it is Corbyn as at least he will provide an opposition, the others are just your typical vacuous power seeking career politicians, who have equally no chance of being PM either. Really disappointed in Yvette Cooper - really thought she could be 'the one' - however the exposure of the election has shown her to be a card board cut out with the personality of a pencil. Her plea to vote for her as shes' a woman was pathetic.

We're all doomed ..... Climate change will get us all anyway.

Re: Harman's Labour 'rebellion'
 

Under FFTP the point of the main parties needs to be to get elected. You can't change anything if you don't win and if that means compromising in order to appeal to a larger electorate then that is better, in my view, than remaining ideologically pure but losing. It's unfair to say they have no principles, they're pragmatic enough to know principles are useless if you're powerless to put them into effect.

Maybe they're right-wing because the public are? The Daily Mail is one of the most popular papers in Britain, as is The Sun but The Mirror less so. Maybe the proprietors are trying to spoon-fed the public or maybe the papers are just trying to pander to their audience. People gravitate to their own biases and then exist in a bubble where their ideas aren't challenged.

The left-wing equivalent of the right-wing press is social media. People on Twitter and Reddit all talking to each other, backing up each others' arguments, posting links to left-wing pieces and vilifying the right until they've become so far detached from reality that they think Scotland will be Independent, Labour will win the election and Corbyn will win the next one. Even this forum has a echo-chamber effect to the point where some members thought UKIP were about to storm the General Election.

A lot of the left aren't liberals or social democrats unfortunately. They're just 1980s socialists with more progressive, sometimes obsessive, views on identity politics.

Re: Harman's Labour 'rebellion'
 

well if you take the view labour will be happy in opposition, then yes he will provide a more better opposition and actually vote against changes not just abstain or back them up.

Re: Harman's Labour 'rebellion'
 

That's not proper opposition though. They don't have a majority. The Government will smile and pass whatever they please.

Re: Harman's Labour 'rebellion'
 

For opposition to be effective it has to be credible. Corbyn's simply enjoying the sort of feting that Vince Cable attracted for a while and look what happened to him. If the other candidates weren't so lacklustre he'd be nowhere.

Re: Harman's Labour 'rebellion'
 

This will be seen as a summer of madness. I think it will unravel very quickly once the hype and excitement dies down. He has too many dodgy connections in his past to survive the Tory onslaught. Even Michael Foot wanted to retain the Falklands!

Re: Harman's Labour 'rebellion'
 

You make a really good point here. Look at the reaction to the migrant issue at the moment ..

Re: Harman's Labour 'rebellion'
 

Basically labour have to be a tory clone to have a chance, a tory clone is poor opposition sadly. so its a choice of challenging the government in opposition or trying to get elected. As I said bad times for labour I think the only electable candidate is liz kendell.

The tories did the same before the election they won, they were not challenging labour, backed them on bank bailout etc.

Re: Harman's Labour 'rebellion'
 

Unlike Maggie and her government


http://www.theguardian.com/uk/2005/j...falklands.past

I quite like Corbyn, finally a politician who actually stands up for what he believes in regardless of how popular they might be and isn't out to feather his own nest, perhaps that might be why these plastic career politician clones are soiling themselves, the game might finally be up for them at last.

Re: Harman's Labour 'rebellion'
 

I think a lot of them are worried because there is a good chance he'll seriously harm Labour support. Also Corbyn has been in Westminster since the 1980s. He is pretty much a career politician too it's just that unlikely pretty much anyone on the front benches he hasn't ever had to compromise.

Re: Harman's Labour 'rebellion'
 

Please, that's not the definition of career politician most would recognise, I think they'd see them as those types that have never had a job outside politics or Westminster unless it was to aid them getting there of course, never give a straight answer or even any answer to any question no matter how innocent, all look similar and whose favourite pass time is trying to get away with trousering as much in expenses as possible.

Re: Harman's Labour 'rebellion'
 

Corbyn's enjoyed the luxury of having a safe seat and having little or nothing expected of or demanded from him. That's all about to change and as his pie in the sky 'policies' come under scrutiny it'll be interesting to see how well he performs and how credible he remains, if indeed he ever was.

As for Russell Brand, well having just given 'Corbs' his personal endorsement, it seems he's concluded that social media has addled his brain so he's decided to quit. :D

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/cele...the-story.html

Oh and is it just me or does Brand believe he's Jesus? :)

Re: Harman's Labour 'rebellion'
 

It is just you ..

Re: Harman's Labour 'rebellion'
 

He's not Jesus, he's Brian. Hang on, Brian Brand has a certain ring to it ;)

Re: Harman's Labour 'rebellion'
 

So .. "He's not the Messiah" :)