The next big leader?

Alexia
Posts: 2999
Joined: Sat 01 Oct, 2005 17.50

Neil DG wrote:Finally, it seems very presumptive of MPs to, in effect, say "we don't care what members and supporters voted, we know best what's right for the party."
They've been doing that for years mind.
all new Phil
Posts: 1965
Joined: Sun 13 Feb, 2005 00.04
Location: Next door to Hell

All this leaves a big gaping hole right in the centre ground. The Lib Dems would be wise to position themselves there but I can't see that happening - they seem (along with a lot of people) to think that public opinion has shifted to the left. Despite the Tories having recently won a majority.

The other possibility is that those on the right of the Labour Party leave and form a new centre ground party. I think many of them are currently seriously considering this.
cwathen
Posts: 1309
Joined: Fri 15 Aug, 2003 17.28

Neil DG wrote:
cwathen wrote:The first thing that happened upon his election were a number MPs including 3 members of the shadow cabinet announcing that they aren't prepared to be on the front bench with him - you've got key people within the party believing that he shouldn't be in the job and that's before he's even started doing it. If he lasts more than a year or so I will eat my hat.
Firstly, there was an incredible presumption that they would be asked to continue.

Secondly, Jamie Reed (in particular) was extremely rude in tweeting his resignation publicly while Corbyn was actually giving his first leader's speech.
Indeed, but usually the order of the day when you have a new boss is to suck up to him even if you do have doubts - condemnation normally only follows after he's screwed you over. It's an incredibly powerful message to quit purely because of the appointment of a given person - essentially you have senior figures publicly casting their own vote of no confidence from the outset.
User avatar
WillPS
Posts: 2456
Joined: Tue 22 Apr, 2008 18.32
Location: Carlton
Contact:

all new Phil wrote:All this leaves a big gaping hole right in the centre ground. The Lib Dems would be wise to position themselves there but I can't see that happening - they seem (along with a lot of people) to think that public opinion has shifted to the left. Despite the Tories having recently won a majority.

The other possibility is that those on the right of the Labour Party leave and form a new centre ground party. I think many of them are currently seriously considering this.
So the shift to the left is an entirely Scottish phenomenon? No, of course it's not. It just so happens that the SNP were the only party with a properly left/anti-austerity message with any chance of electoral success under our ridiculous system.

The story elsewhere (unless you are lucky enough to live in Brighton Pavilion or one of the handful of seats where Plaid stand a chance) was a choice between voting for an apologetic centrist Labour party candidate or a candidate with no chance of success. There was no viable left choice.
Neil DG wrote:
cwathen wrote:The first thing that happened upon his election were a number MPs including 3 members of the shadow cabinet announcing that they aren't prepared to be on the front bench with him - you've got key people within the party believing that he shouldn't be in the job and that's before he's even started doing it. If he lasts more than a year or so I will eat my hat.
Firstly, there was an incredible presumption that they would be asked to continue.

Secondly, Jamie Reed (in particular) was extremely rude in tweeting his resignation publicly while Corbyn was actually giving his first leader's speech.

Finally, it seems very presumptive of MPs to, in effect, say "we don't care what members and supporters voted, we know best what's right for the party."
Treacherous cunts. I wish there was the power to recall, I'm sure Chris Leslie for one would not be behaving in this way if there was.
Image
cwathen
Posts: 1309
Joined: Fri 15 Aug, 2003 17.28

WillPS wrote:So the shift to the left is an entirely Scottish phenomenon? No, of course it's not. It just so happens that the SNP were the only party with a properly left/anti-austerity message with any chance of electoral success under our ridiculous system.

The story elsewhere (unless you are lucky enough to live in Brighton Pavilion or one of the handful of seats where Plaid stand a chance) was a choice between voting for an apologetic centrist Labour party candidate or a candidate with no chance of success. There was no viable left choice.
Are you frigging serious? You're essentially arguing that there really was a mass shift to the left, but because there wasn't a 'left enough' alternative to the Tories in most constituencies then that caused voters to react by moving right? We may well have opposed political views, but that argument is frankly unworthy of you.
WillPS wrote:Treacherous cunts. I wish there was the power to recall, I'm sure Chris Leslie for one would not be behaving in this way if there was.
Chris Leslie is a 'treacherous cunt' and should be recalled? Based on what? Maybe he actually has a more vested interest in the Labour party, spanning more years and with more at stake if the party goes south than people like you who chucked a few quid in the hat to cast a vote and won't suffer any serious personal consequence if it all goes tits up. Maybe also as a result he should have a louder voice. This will fundamentally be the problem with Corbyn-lead Labour, he may well have a valid mandate in terms of numbers but there will always be questions asked about whether or not it is right that all those who did cast a vote should have been entitled to do so - and therein is a fundamental attack on socialism which will divide the party.

Have fun anyway.
User avatar
WillPS
Posts: 2456
Joined: Tue 22 Apr, 2008 18.32
Location: Carlton
Contact:

cwathen wrote:
WillPS wrote:So the shift to the left is an entirely Scottish phenomenon? No, of course it's not. It just so happens that the SNP were the only party with a properly left/anti-austerity message with any chance of electoral success under our ridiculous system.

The story elsewhere (unless you are lucky enough to live in Brighton Pavilion or one of the handful of seats where Plaid stand a chance) was a choice between voting for an apologetic centrist Labour party candidate or a candidate with no chance of success. There was no viable left choice.
Are you frigging serious? You're essentially arguing that there really was a mass shift to the left, but because there wasn't a 'left enough' alternative to the Tories in most constituencies then that caused voters to react by moving right? We may well have opposed political views, but that argument is frankly unworthy of you.
I am saying there is a strong left leaning contingent throughout the country which has been essentially ignored by the Labour Party for the last 20 years and has finally found an outlet in Scotland in the form of the SNP.

Note that the turnout in Scotland was 5% higher than the turnout in England. When you consider the tiny number of voters which actually decide the formation of parliament, that's significant.
cwathen wrote:
WillPS wrote:Treacherous cunts. I wish there was the power to recall, I'm sure Chris Leslie for one would not be behaving in this way if there was.
Chris Leslie is a 'treacherous cunt' and should be recalled? Based on what? Maybe he actually has a more vested interest in the Labour party, spanning more years and with more at stake if the party goes south than people like you who chucked a few quid in the hat to cast a vote and won't suffer any serious personal consequence if it all goes tits up. Maybe also as a result he should have a louder voice. This will fundamentally be the problem with Corbyn-lead Labour, he may well have a valid mandate in terms of numbers but there will always be questions asked about whether or not it is right that all those who did cast a vote should have been entitled to do so - and therein is a fundamental attack on socialism which will divide the party.

Have fun anyway.
Based on the fact he is refusing to work as part of a shadow cabinet lead by somebody who won a democratic election by a convincing majority. He was parachuted in to an extremely safe seat having failed to hold on to his own seat in 2005. He owes it to the party members who installed him to that privileged position to follow the leadership they have installed. If he doesn't like what the membership of the party are telling him, he should not pretend to be representing them.
Image
User avatar
Pete
Posts: 7589
Joined: Fri 15 Aug, 2003 13.36
Location: Dundee

WillPS wrote:I am saying there is a strong left leaning contingent throughout the country which has been essentially ignored by the Labour Party for the last 20 years and has finally found an outlet in Scotland in the form of the SNP.
I think that is some of the issue, but tbh I think this is more the issue

Image

Left, Leftish, For Idiots, Left, Left, Left(ish), Centre-Right.

So that's the centre-left / left vote being split five ways, and the centre-right vote being split... er... one way.
"He has to be larger than bacon"
User avatar
WillPS
Posts: 2456
Joined: Tue 22 Apr, 2008 18.32
Location: Carlton
Contact:

I accept that's certainly a factor, and for Labour to ever stand a chance of winning they need to match the SNP's on their anti-austerity message; and reach out to grab the majority share of the Green's vote.

The fact remains that as an English voter, unless you lived in Brighton, you had no candidate offering an anti-austerity message with any real chance of winning. When the only message available is "we need to take even money out of public services", there is fuck all in the way of hope.
Image
robschneider
Posts: 324
Joined: Wed 14 Aug, 2013 14.53

For idiots? Could say the same about Labour now!

I think there's a huge chance of the party actually splitting into two. Socialism isn't something that comes naturally to us anymore. Middle England will see him as fiscally reckless. We've got a good decade of Conservative rule now
User avatar
WillPS
Posts: 2456
Joined: Tue 22 Apr, 2008 18.32
Location: Carlton
Contact:

robschneider wrote:For idiots? Could say the same about Labour now!

I think there's a huge chance of the party actually splitting into two. Socialism isn't something that comes naturally to us anymore. Middle England will see him as fiscally reckless. We've got a good decade of Conservative rule now
Keep on moving, Grandad.
Image
DTV
Posts: 174
Joined: Mon 12 Mar, 2012 19.27

At the 2015 Election the political compass looked like this.
Image

Now it looks a lot more like this
Image

The SNP may claim to be able to work with Labour but that is definitely only in Westminster. When it comes to Holyrood they are shitting themselves and is almost definitely why they've announced a second referendum - attempting to get the 45% on side because they know some people only voted for them because they were anti-austerity and believed they'd get a Labour-SNP government anyway. Now they have a potentially more anti-austerity, more left-wing party up against them those 60% polling figures look unlikely to be seen again. The left have always done well in Holyrood, 10 years ago there was a block of 13 Scottish Socialists and Scottish Greens, both of whom are to the left of the England and Wales Green Party and this time the Scots Greens look like they may become the fourth party in the Parliament. But the Greens, particularly outside Brighton will be screwed - their polling is going to be going down over the next few months - the Greens will want an alliance with Labour in 2020 but that won't happen because the Greens four main targets are all Labour held. The fact is the centre-left and left wing parties aren't going to be happy with this, First Past the Post only rewards big parties - therefore only the SNP will be able to assert any form of dominance. It is also why the Blairites won't split from the Labour Party - they aren't idiots they know that Labour would still have an electoral advantage.The problem Plaid and the Greens now face is why vote for a party who won't have any power when you can vote for Labour who have a chance of forming a government?

On the left-right issue calling Miliband left-wing is ridiculous and Clegg even more so. Nick Clegg is one of the 'orange booker' faction of the Liberal Democrats - those who pledge their allegiance to L'aissez Faire economics - he and his number two Danny Alexander were far closer to the pre-60s Liberal Party than of the socially liberal party of the 70s and beyond. Miliband also doesn't cross the centre-line, though he may do personally, his leadership was constantly moored to the Third Way 'social'-ism of New Labour. Though he may have opened a distinctive third ideological tradition aside from the Browism and Blairism of the government years, his lack of ability to drag the party in any direction led them to the defeat as they stood for jack-shit. If Miliband is left-wing that Harold MacMillan was a communist - MacMillan's economic policy was left-wing, even more so than the SNP's. In fact MacMillan's Neddys are closest we've ever got to economic planning. The problem is left and right are used so indefinetively and lazily these days, and the word 'centrist' even more so. These days there appears to be a consensus that Labour are always left of centre and the Tories have always been right of centre and the Liberals in the middle. It's simply not true - the ideology of the Labour Party has over time shifted rightwards until Saturday (and after Wilson took over from Gaitskell), the Liberals were historically to the right of the Conservatives and the Tories have gone through bouts of One Nation Conservatism under Disraeli and between 1951 and 1975 and at other times have been economically Liberal such as under Peel, the inter-war periods and since 1975. Social policy is different from economic policy - you can be economically left-wing and socially liberal like Bevan, Attlee and Corbyn but you can be economically left-wing and socially authoritarian like Stalin. You can also be economically right-wing and socially liberal like a classical liberal but you can be economically right-wing and socially authoritarian like Thatcher or Blair. And if you so wish you can even be economically centrist and totalitarian like Hitler. That's why the compass is better than the spectrum.
Post Reply