Next Labour leader - Starmer and Rayner win

RedChip · Jan 18, 2020

Watched the hustings. Whilst my choice is Starmer, I'm developing respect for Nandy. Whoever wins should make use of her in a senior role.

For those who support Philips, what exactly do you see in her? I can see she is passionate, but lacks composure and seems to centre everything about her or her experiences.

I would like to hear a clear articulation of Long Bailey's vision other than that she is a socialist.

I don't think Thornberry is in the race.

As such, my current preference order is:

Starmer
Nandy
Long-Bailey Phillips Thornberry

Sweet Square · Jan 18, 2020

esmufc07 said:
Hopefully it’s correct and @Sweet Square goes into a period of mourning.

I did try this after the election lost but you kept annoying me for my opinion and sadly because of my kind and generous nature, I came back into this thread.

But yes I will lose all interest in the Labour Party, if it does in fact elect a bank manager for leader.

esmufc07 · Jan 18, 2020

Sweet Square said:
I did try this after the election lost but you kept annoying me for my opinion and sadly because of my kind and generous nature, I came back into this thread.

But yes I will lose all interest in the Labour Party, if it does in fact elect a bank manager for leader.

Perhaps he should just take money from Iran instead.

Redlambs · Jan 18, 2020

Funny how it's always the "centrists" fault, yet not a single "lefty" in this thread sees the attitude and problems coming from their side. Like the utter unwillingness to compromise. It's always us vs them and the blame game, nothing else.

Once again, lessons are not learned. Once again the party divide goes both ways.

Flying high · Jan 18, 2020

How far do you want us to compromise sir?

Personally Corbyn's last Labour manifesto started to get to grips with the issues we have. Maybe 10% of the changes needed. The compromise was already on 90% of this capitalist monstrosity remaining in place.

Redlambs · Jan 18, 2020

Flying high said:
How far do you want us to compromise sir?

Personally Corbyn's last Labour manifesto started to get to grips with the issues we have. Maybe 10% of the changes needed. The compromise was already on 90% of this capitalist monstrosity remaining in place.

Meh, don't worry I'm sure you'll eventually get your way somehow. I mean 10 years of getting it with Corbyn clearly wasn't enough.

Out of interest, do you have a pick for leader yet?

Flying high · Jan 18, 2020

Redlambs said:
Meh, don't worry I'm sure you'll eventually get your way somehow. I mean 10 years of getting it with Corbyn clearly wasn't enough.

Out of interest, do you have a pick for leader yet?

Been waiting my lifetime for a left wing government. Kinda used to it even if I think it's ridiculous.

No, not really. I think Starmer is more well rounded than most of them, if a little wooden. I know nothing about Nandy. Phillips is awful. RLB's policies are fine, but is too... well I just can't take to her. Thornberry I like and I'm not sure why she doesn't seem more popular. Though I confess I haven't looked deeply into her history or policies.

Redlambs · Jan 18, 2020

Flying high said:
Been waiting my lifetime for a left wing government. Kinda used to it even if I think it's ridiculous.

No, not really. I think Starmer is more well rounded than most of them, if a little wooden. I know nothing about Nandy. Phillips is awful. RLB's policies are fine, but is too... well I just can't take to her. Thornberry I like and I'm not sure why she doesn't seem more popular. Though I confess I haven't looked deeply into her history or policies.

It is a bit of a tough crowd from what I can see. As sad as it may be, each have issues we know the media can attack. I think Nandy and Starmer could handle it better than most, as well as speaking well. I don't dislike RLB but I think she is already way too caught up in Corbyn's image and she seems to be even pushing that, coupled with the threat of Burgon being her number two that's a disaster zone.

I personally can't stand Thornberry though. Her attitude on election night was exactly the opposite of where Labour should be, and her complete lack of self awareness in her "humour" and all that comrade shite...ugh. She is currently worst case for me.

I don't actually know who my vote is on right now. Sadly I'm not enthused by any of them tbh

Flying high · Jan 18, 2020

Redlambs said:
It is a bit of a tough crowd from what I can see. As sad as it may be, each have issues we know the media can attack. I think Nandy and Starmer could handle it better than most, as well as speaking well. I don't dislike RLB but I think she is already way too caught up in Corbyn's image and she seems to be even pushing that, coupled with the threat of Burgon being her number two that's a disaster zone.

I personally can't stand Thornberry though. Her attitude on election night was exactly the opposite of where Labour should be, and her complete lack of self awareness in her "humour" and all that comrade shite...ugh. She is currently worst case for me.

I don't actually know who my vote is on right now. Sadly I'm not enthused by any of them tbh

Will attack relentlessly. It's a shame only one side seems to have to worry about this.

There's a long time until the next election and the tories will be united for a good 6 months until it all starts to unravel. I think Labour have rushed into a change, though I understand the need for it.

I would have preferred a temporary leader while the dust settles a bit, let the hysteria die down. A chance for the next leader to rise more naturally. But we are here now and we won't really know how any of them will settle into the role until they are in position, so I'm honestly not going to worry too much about it. Sorry if that's not a great point on which to advance a discussion. The tories have once again won a rigged fight and I can only hope that enough people can give whatever imperfect leader the Labour party next put up, a chance to prove there is a better way.

lsd · Jan 19, 2020

I like Starmer and think he is the best person for the job . What sort of message it would say if he was the only male candidate of five people and won is another story mind

berbatrick · Jan 19, 2020

for all the shallow RLB gals, who aren't thinking through the implications of their radicalism

sun_tzu · Jan 19, 2020

RedChip said:
Watched the hustings. Whilst my choice is Starmer, I'm developing respect for Nandy. Whoever wins should make use of her in a senior role.

For those who support Philips, what exactly do you see in her?

I think if starmer nandy Phillips or thornberry wins you will see them utilising the other 3 in senior roles

If wrong daily wins you will see her offering Corbyn McDonald abbot and burgon senior positions

As for Phillips... I think in the soundbite and Twitter landscape of personality politics she would achieve the most cut through and do the most damage to Johnson

Ubik · Jan 19, 2020

Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date

How weird that he could only get 5 people to nominate him, including himself.

esmufc07 · Jan 19, 2020

Ubik said:
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date

How weird that he could only get 5 people to nominate him, including himself.

Honestly.

Maticmaker · Jan 19, 2020

Characterization of would be Labour Leaders;

Rebecca Long Baily - "Corbyn in Skirts"
Jess Phillips - "Gobby School girl"
Emily Thornberry - "Middleclass equivalent of a Fishwife"
Sir Keir Starmer- "The millionaire (would be) philanthropist"
Lisa Nandy - "Manager for 'Red Wall' rebuild"

lsd · Jan 19, 2020

I see Phillips has said it would be an embarrassment if a man wins .

Surely that has to be sexist to say the only male cannot be allowed to win

Buster15 · Jan 19, 2020

Redlambs said:
Funny how it's always the "centrists" fault, yet not a single "lefty" in this thread sees the attitude and problems coming from their side. Like the utter unwillingness to compromise. It's always us vs them and the blame game, nothing else.

Once again, lessons are not learned. Once again the party divide goes both ways.

Very much so. The far left are in denial.
Either that or they are scared of being in power.

Buster15 · Jan 19, 2020

lsd said:
I like Starmer and think he is the best person for the job . What sort of message it would say if he was the only male candidate of five people and won is another story mind

Why should the sex of a person matter.
It is about who is the best candidate. Full stop.

lsd · Jan 19, 2020

Buster15 said:
Why should the sex of a person matter.
It is about who is the best candidate. Full stop.

Because it was too obvious someone would bring it up and Jess Philips did

Shamwow · Jan 19, 2020

Redlambs said:
Funny how it's always the "centrists" fault, yet not a single "lefty" in this thread sees the attitude and problems coming from their side. Like the utter unwillingness to compromise. It's always us vs them and the blame game, nothing else.

Once again, lessons are not learned. Once again the party divide goes both ways.

You're taking shite and keep making the same hypocritical post which is getting boring.

EwanI Ted · Jan 20, 2020

Buster15 said:
Why should the sex of a person matter.
It is about who is the best candidate. Full stop.

"Best" is entirely subjective. And people's subjective views are conditioned by what they're used to. If people are used to seeing white men in positions of leadership, they will believe that white men are best because it fits their learned experience. Once you see women, or people who aren't white, or disabled people, in positions of leadership it begins to change how people define "best" in the first place. They begin to look for different qualities. But sometimes you need to force that first step to disrupt previous beliefs because otherwise you perpetuate a vicious circle.

Sweet Square · Jan 20, 2020

Labour membership surges by 100,000 as leadership race deadline looms tonight

https://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/labour-membership-surges-100000-leadership-21317363?1

Buster15 · Jan 20, 2020

EwanI Ted said:
"Best" is entirely subjective. And people's subjective views are conditioned by what they're used to. If people are used to seeing white men in positions of leadership, they will believe that white men are best because it fits their learned experience. Once you see women, or people who aren't white, or disabled people, in positions of leadership it begins to change how people define "best" in the first place. They begin to look for different qualities. But sometimes you need to force that first step to disrupt previous beliefs because otherwise you perpetuate a vicious circle.

While I tend to agree with all you have said, people are routinely selected as being the best candidate for a specific position.

Selection is always a judgement call and as long as you have used the best available metrics to support that decision then you have done your best.

Selection of the next leader of the Labour Party is absolutely crutial. That person will have a massive job not just to unite the party (assuming that is possible) but to appeal to the whole country.
So. We had better hope that this decision is correct.

711 · Jan 20, 2020

EwanI Ted said:
"Best" is entirely subjective. And people's subjective views are conditioned by what they're used to. If people are used to seeing white men in positions of leadership, they will believe that white men are best because it fits their learned experience. Once you see women, or people who aren't white, or disabled people, in positions of leadership it begins to change how people define "best" in the first place. They begin to look for different qualities. But sometimes you need to force that first step to disrupt previous beliefs because otherwise you perpetuate a vicious circle.

Would you vote for a candidate because of their sex, even if you believed them to be less capable of succeeding?

RedChip · Jan 20, 2020

lsd said:
I see Phillips has said it would be an embarrassment if a man wins .

Surely that has to be sexist to say the only male cannot be allowed to win

I think one potential interpretation is that it is embarrassing that four women can't beat the one man. So, would give her some leeway.

FlawlessThaw · Jan 20, 2020

RedChip said:
I think one potential interpretation is that it is embarrassing that four women can't beat the one man. So, would give her some leeway.

Yeah that was my interpretation. It was an unnecessary comment though as it feeds the knuckle-draggers.

Shamwow · Jan 20, 2020

Buster15 said:
While I tend to agree with all you have said, people are routinely selected as being the best candidate for a specific position.

Selection is always a judgement call and as long as you have used the best available metrics to support that decision then you have done your best.

Selection of the next leader of the Labour Party is absolutely crutial. That person will have a massive job not just to unite the party (assuming that is possible) but to appeal to the whole country.
So. We had better hope that this decision is correct.

It's never that precise judgement call though and if everything else is reasonably equal then it's certainly a plus point to have a mixed race woman when you've only had white men in the past in as much as she will have different experiences and insights that she can bring to the role.

Sweet Square · Jan 20, 2020

Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date

For the Starmer lot on here, whats your view ?

BennyBlanco · Jan 20, 2020

Should not, would end up alienating a majority of consituencies again and ultimately irrelevant to the policies needed.

EwanI Ted · Jan 20, 2020

711 said:
Would you vote for a candidate because of their sex, even if you believed them to be less capable of succeeding?

I realise you dont mean anything bad by that comment, but it highlights the exact problem. Women are less likely to succeed in getting traditional senior leadership roles because they're women. Social prejudices work against them in numerous ways that make it harder for them to succeed. So if you want the person "most likely to succeed", you will usually choose a good looking, tall, white, non-disabled man, because those same social prejudices work for them not against them.

The most important question is, can this person do the job? If yes, then I'd vote for a woman even if they had a bigger hill to climb buy virtue of their sex.

sullydnl · Jan 20, 2020

Sweet Square said:
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date

For the Starmer lot on here, whats your view ?

Immediately campaigning to rejoin the EU would be political suicide. At this point Remain is so thoroughly dead as a political position that it will be quite some time before Rejoin becomes at all viable. If any of the leadership candidates are still looking to fight this fight then they should be immediately discounted. What their supporters think is neither here nor there really.

Sweet Square · Jan 20, 2020

sullydnl said:
Immediately campaigning to rejoin the EU would be political suicide. At this point Remain is so thoroughly dead as a political position that it will be quite some time before Rejoin becomes at all viable. If any of the leadership candidates are still looking to fight this fight then they should be immediately discounted. What their supporters think is neither here nor there really.

Agree but thats not going to stop ultra remain people from joining the party and pushing forward the most remain-ish candidate(The newest jump in membership hasn't been with the cheapest join option, so chances are it isn't a bunch of left wingers).

711 · Jan 20, 2020

EwanI Ted said:
I realise you dont mean anything bad by that comment, but it highlights the exact problem. Women are less likely to succeed in getting traditional senior leadership roles because they're women. Social prejudices work against them in numerous ways that make it harder for them to succeed. So if you want the person "most likely to succeed", you will usually choose a good looking, tall, white, non-disabled man, because those same social prejudices work for them not against them.

The most important question is, can this person do the job? If yes, then I'd vote for a woman even if they had a bigger hill to climb buy virtue of their sex.

I didn't use the phrase 'likely to succeed' I said 'capable of succeeding'. You seem to hold a mass of personal prejudices and assume everyone else must too. I can't help but infer from your answer that you would vote for a woman before a man, a short person before a tall one, a non-white before a white and a disabled person before someone not, even though the latter two you often can't even tell by just looking at them. You can avoid all that nonsense simply by voting for the person you think has the best ideas, objectives and ability to carry them out.

Sweet Square · Jan 20, 2020

The fact Starmer is the only man in the race and is clearly seen as the only electable one, basically points to a under current of sexism within Labour politics. It was similar during the 2016 leadership election when Owen Smith got picked over Angela Eagle(Ok they were both god awful but Smith was on another level of pure shite)and I'm pretty sure there was someone working in Corbyn team who got done for sexist abuse of a co worker, yet this person didn't get fired. When the tories have you beaten in terms of female leaders, there's clearly a problem.

So just on a pure representational level its pretty bleak if Starmer wins.

711 · Jan 20, 2020

Sweet Square said:
The fact Starmer is the only man in the race and is clearly seen as the only electable one, basically points to a under current of sexism within Labour politics. It was similar during the 2016 leadership election when Owen Smith got picked over Angela Eagle(Ok they were both god awful but Smith was on another level of pure shite)and I'm pretty sure there was someone working in Corbyn team who got done for sexist abuse of a co worker, yet this person didn't get fired. When the tories have you beaten in terms of female leaders, there's clearly a problem.

So just on a pure representational level its pretty bleak if Starmer wins.

Men are shockingly under-represented in the leadership race you're quite right. Maybe some sort of quota system should be introduced?

And because it's the internet I'd best confirm I am actually taking the piss, I personally believe in supporting the individual, not the sex.

RedChip · Jan 20, 2020

EwanI Ted said:
I realise you dont mean anything bad by that comment, but it highlights the exact problem. Women are less likely to succeed in getting traditional senior leadership roles because they're women. Social prejudices work against them in numerous ways that make it harder for them to succeed. So if you want the person "most likely to succeed", you will usually choose a good looking, tall, white, non-disabled man, because those same social prejudices work for them not against them.

The most important question is, can this person do the job? If yes, then I'd vote for a woman even if they had a bigger hill to climb buy virtue of their sex.

I agree. It is a difficult one. When we say the best candidate, we don't even know how much sexist bias we have unconsciously tapped into to arrive at that choice. I mean it turns out even machine learning cannot manage avoiding sexism.

sun_tzu · Jan 20, 2020

Sweet Square said:
The fact Starmer is the only man in the race and is clearly seen as the only electable one, basically points to a under current of sexism within Labour politics.

To be fair I think he's seen as the most electable one not the only electable one

I think nandy and Phillips are seen as too moderate by the left

Rlb is seen as a joke by all outside momentum based on thinking continuing the Corbyn policies is a viable option

Thornberry was Lucky to get enough nominations and I don't think anybody thinks she has a chance but more based on her voters are too thick / white van man mistakes in the past

Starmer served in the Corbyn cabinet but clearly wants to take a different direction and without the baggage of thornberry

I think it's pragmatic rather than sexist

And although I'd prefer Phillips I'm comfortable with anybody except rlb or thornberry

Redlambs · Jan 20, 2020

So far I'm fine with Nandy or Starmer, though is there any chance we get to know who they'd plan on working closely with as a shadow cabinet? As someone said earlier, the fear with RLB is having Corbyn, Burgon and Abbott involved.

As for the brexit question, I don't believe it's a good idea to immediately push on that front. Remain is dead in the water right now, we need to make the best of all this and see what the future brings before risking splitting everyone again.

Ubik · Jan 20, 2020

USDAW union backs Starmer, so he's made the ballot.

esmufc07 · Jan 20, 2020

Ubik said:
USDAW union backs Starmer, so he's made the ballot.

USDAW are sexist too it seems.

Next Labour leader - Starmer and Rayner win

Full Member

Full Member

Brad

Creator of the Caftards comics

Full Member

Creator of the Caftards comics

Full Member

Creator of the Caftards comics

Full Member

The Oracle

Renaissance Man

The Art of Bore

Nothing happens until something moves!

Brad

Full Member

The Oracle

Go on Didier

Go on Didier

The Oracle

listens to shit music & watches Mrs Brown's Boys

Full Member

Full Member

Go on Didier

Verified Bird Expert

Full Member

most 'know it all' poster

listens to shit music & watches Mrs Brown's Boys

Full Member

fixated with Shaw's bum

Full Member

Ross Kemp's caf ID

Full Member

Verified Bird Expert

Full Member

Verified Bird Expert

Full Member

The Art of Bore

Creator of the Caftards comics

Nothing happens until something moves!

Brad