The next leader of the Labour Party (and other matters)

[Brendan]

I speaking from personal experience of some very unpleasant individuals I?ve met. But I will leave this now as I don?t want to hi-jack yet another thread with dissident ranting.

[Marmora Man]

david_carnell Wrote:

Both Miliband brothers attended state comprehensives and gained access to Oxford Uni on their own aptitude. I can't imagine their father paying for their education!

D Milliband (don't know about Ed) gained his Oxford place on 2 Bs & a D and on the back of an LEA scheme to help inner city comprehensive children get to good universities. Since he hailed from a strong left wing academic background where money, aspiration and access to wider horizons were the norm he wasn't exactly the sort of inner city child the scheme had in mind.

[Marmora Man]

Brendan Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

I speaking from personal experience of some very unpleasant individuals I?ve met. But I will leave this now as I don?t want to hi-jack yet another thread with dissident ranting.

You should get out more Brendan and meet some normal conservatives. I'd recommend Andy Stranack as a good corrective - he was the prospective Conservative candidate for Camberwell and Peckham in the recent election - very far from your caricature of a Tory.

I've been arguing for right of centre, libertarian and conservative thinking since this forum was established; I'm fairly sure that at least some of my virtual opponents find that I'm not too vicious or bloody minded in person.

[Loz]

I've been arguing for right of centre, libertarian and conservative thinking since this forum was established; I'm fairly sure that at least some of my virtual opponents find that I'm not too vicious or bloody minded in person.

Sometimes, as the current LibDem dilemma is showing, simple Left/Right doesn't quite explain everything. I don;t know if you've seen this before:

The Political Compass

It tries to expand the 2D left/right model into a 3D left/right, authoritarian/libertarian model. Still simplistic, but better.

As a guess (and to probably start a debate), I'd say:

- Labout: Red Quadrant

- Tory: Purple Quadrant (though I'm sure some would argue they may be Blue)

- LibDem: Green Quadrant

- The Coalition: Purple Quadrant.

I'm currently very slightly in the purple quadrant, having (I'd guess) moved from the green quadrant I was probably in when I was younger. Which is probably why, even as a (current, but swingable) LibDem voter, the Coalition policies aren't too much of a problem for me.

But it also shows why the LibDems could equally partner with either Labour or the Tories, as although they match Labour on the economic scale, they can sit alongside the Tories on the social (authoritarian) scale.

[citizenED]

There is a live debate between all the candidates in the Leadership Race on Radio 5 right now. Its streamed on the Beeb's website too.

[ImpetuousVrouw]

I got a vote through my union, and put Dianne Abbott No 1 and Andy Burnham No 2 - didn't know he had backed the Iraq war though and wouldn't have voted for him if I'd known it.

[DJKillaQueen]

I think Diane will do well in London but overall I think we are going to get a Milliband.....

[Ladymuck]

I'm for Ed...he is more for equality.

Miliband not Balls!

[????]

i'm for ED 'cos I had a bet on him ages ago at 5s. He'll never be PM tho...whereas Dave just might

[david_carnell]

I voted Ed and the misses has a bet on him too. Fingers crossed. Although I'm more optimistic for his potential success than ????.

And for those who have missed it....Ken Livingstone is Labour's nomination for London Mayor in 2012.

Ding ding. Round two.

[Ladymuck]

Yay! Me for Ken! (I just cannot take Boris seriously...though he does make me laugh)

[Marmora Man]

It seems it will be one of the Millibands. As someone interested in the result in order to determine the quality of opposition and likelihood (or otherwise) of Labour toppling the Coaltion / Conservatives at next election my preferences are for the one most likely to lead Labour into the wilderness. So ......

Ed was not in Parliament when his Party voted to go to war in Iraq and Afghanistan, he has also accepted that identity cards and other police state laws were not entirely good things. When he was Environment Secretary in the Brown Government he gave the impression of believing the drivel he was given to read out. He appears to be conciliating the left of Labour and may corral the wagons to become progressive in the way that the Lib Dems were progressive - ie they always talked to themselves with approval but didn't persuade voters to put them into power.

David is irremediably tainted with the Blair and Brown regime. He supported the Iraq / Afghanistan wars - which may persuade many erstwhile Labour voters to abstain if he leads the party. He supported every police state law that Blair / Brown brought forward - again this will not necessarily endear him to "old" labour members. His rise to prominence without any real evidence of independent thought demonstrates some key political skills - but they are scarcely appropriate to a potential leader of the country. He does not appear to have wholehearted support of his wider constituency.

So - either way I don't see Ed or David being able to lead their party back into power - but on balance I believe David is slightly more likely to ensure a two term Conservative administration - he therefore gets my vote.

[Loz]

Didn't Ed write the Labour manifesto for the last election?

Personally, I think David has all the qualities of a used car salesman. I think it's the hair. Ed, at least, doesn't look like he sell off grandma at the first opportunity.

[katie1997]

If I had to choose the better leader for the party, it would most definitely be Ed who seems to be more personable than his peculiar brother. I don't think David has leadership qualities as he is uninspiring.

Agree with MarmoraMan, David would ensure the Coalition Government stays in term for longer ...

So not really a good result either way in my opinion. I reckon Ed will get it though.

[Marmora Man]

Ed wins 51% to 49%. Not

a ringing endorsement. Is the scene set for a fraticidal battle to replace the TB/GB era?

[david_carnell]

I'm delighted it's Ed. I voted for him after hearing him speak. I hope the rest of the country were as inspired as I was. I genuinely believe he can be a progressive force for change with the Labour movement and country at large.

Whilst the margin of victory was small I do not forsee the same back room deals and subsequent squabbling between him and David that infected the party in the Blair/Brown era. Mother Miliband should put a stop to that!

I'm looking forward to his speech on Tuesday and recommend you all tune in, even if you wouldn't normally.

[Ladymuck]

Yes!!!

Let's hope he sticks to his words on the fairness/equality front.

[????]

DC - the problem for ED is crystalsed by your post. You're, I think, a consistent and commited socialist. I think there are many similar socialists in the Labour Party and certainly the Trade Unions, many of whom on voted for Ed or presumably he got their 2nd vote over Dave (apologies if intacacies of the Leadership vote are wrong).But, you are socialists a pretty small, possibly shrinking, part of the electorate. We've never really bought into it, even Atlee only got one terms. Ed made all the right noises to win the 'party' vote and all the wrong ones for the electorate. I expect the Tories are delighted.

[Marmora Man]

???? - I agree your analysis, tho' I thought his brother David would have been a worse leader, alienating many in his party by slavish loyalty to first Blair (who wasn't ever really liked by old Labour) and then Brown who he couldn't ever quite bring himself to challenge.

What are the current odds on Cameron as PM again after the next election. Should be a sure fire bet now I think

[MitchK]

I love it how they keep saying they need to UNITE the party, since that is the Union that effectively got him elected. Dear old Tony Woodley was crowing on Sky news after the result. Good job he was less successful with his strike against BA, otherwise we'd all be flying Lufthansa now.

Enjoy the wilderness.

[Loz]

I think Labour chose the best from what was on offer. His acceptance speech was interesting - when he spoke from the heart he was good, but when he was trawling his way through his speech-writer's "I get it" attempt at something Obama-esque it all got a bit mechanical and turgid.

Ed's problem is now to distance himself from the unions. They got him the gig when the MPs and the party preferred his brother. If he doesn't show that he is independent from Woodley and co then Cameron will have a field day.

Personally, I think he is likeable and electable, but if he shifts Labour too far left he will drag them into long-term opposition. At the moment, I don't think the Tories and Lib Dems are shaking in their boots, but it will depend on how Ed handles the post-spending review period.

David M will be looking back tonight at whether he blew his chance before the election when he should have challenged Brown. I suspect he won't defend his seat at the next election and head off to the City.

[silverfox]

Loz said:

"...Ed's problem is now to distance himself from the unions..."

Surely Ed's problem is to show he's a man rather than the nancy boy, never had a real job, image he personifies. Bob Crowe will eat him for breakfast. Disaster for Labour in my (not so humble) opinion. Europe must be laughing it's socks off!

[SeanMacGabhann]

As with cables speech earlier this week, any teeny tiny nod to the left his met with hysterical reaction

Socialism, red Ed, unions back in power blah blah blah.

We will see

[????]

Oh, don't get me wrong, aside from my actual personal opinions/views on the merits or otherwise od Ed, in terms of Labour's strategy I believe the media and criticism will be to go on about Red Ed and I think some will stick, and to the degree that he was largely put in by the Unions then there will be some traction to this, but it will of course be exaggerated and had already started pre the result. So, for those reasons alone I personally think Labour would have had more chance under the other one. But, of course, as you said Sean we will see.

[????]

To add - I think that Labour Party members and committed Union members tend also to talk too much to themselvse (and often through the Guardian...not fishing here) and honestly not 'get' that the trad working class don't exist as they once did, that Unions tend to represent Public Sector workers who are about 20%(?) of teh workforce and that, and voting history bears me out on this, the british electorate aren't that keen when it moves too far off the centre, especially to the left. Has their been a paradigm shift in people's attitude becuase of the financial meltdown? I don't see much evidence of it.