Topic: Doesn't matter who you vote for as long as it's for the right reasons!

[Red-Soldier]

Brown was an absolute disaster!  Not leader material at all!

You then go and compound the issue by having Milliband, followed by Corbyn.  Hardly surprising to see where the party ended up.

[Zeb]

The problem is that, with Corbyn came the baggage that was a turnoff for millions of voters - the IRA stuff, the Hamas/Hezbollah shenanigans, the sniffy 'nuclear button' response, etc - that allowed the media to build and hammer home the narrative that Corbyn and Labour hated Britain (absolutely not true - but then, I believe a country IS its people - not its history, not its conventions, not its establishment, but its people, here and now, and Corbyn undoubtedly wanted to improve the lives of the majority of its people, at the expense of the parasites and vultures who've profited hugely over the past 40 years from a socio-economic agenda that is merely different shades of that ploughed through by that evil cow The Thatcher).

All that baggage also comes with McDonnell, and with knobs on. McDonnell was far more explicit publicly than Corbyn ever was on anything but solidarity with authoritarian regimes in the Middle East and Latin America. One of Corbyn's 'strengths' was that he was a fairly blank slate on domestic policy so people could project onto him. Why loads of stuff I'm in favour of ended up being magpied into 'Corbynism'. The anti-austerity message was good but the keeping of the benefit cuts (in effect to fund middle class tax cuts) was beyond shite and intended purely to signal austerity politics would continue. Amusingly, 2017 is apparently the new holy text so I struggle to wrap my head around that one from likes of Whittome who ought to be smarter than playing to Pidcock's core vote.

[Nobby Reserve]

Brown was an absolute disaster!  Not leader material at all!

You then go and compound the issue by having Milliband, followed by Cobyn.  Hardly surprising to see where the party ended up.

And yet, if he'd have gone for a GE in autumn 07, he'd have almost certainly have secured a majority, albeit a smaller one than he piggy-backed on.

How differently things would have turned out 

Given he'd have been better able to manage the narrative in the wake of the GFC, and (one would hope) would have gone down the fiscal stimulation route rather than use the GFC fallout as a cover for decimating public services under the guise of 'austerity', we could well have been back into economic growth by 2012, with the national feelgood factor of the Olympics still in place.

I'd bet my house we'd have still been in the EU.

[Andy @ Allerton!]

And yet, if he'd have gone for a GE in autumn 07, he'd have almost certainly have secured a majority, albeit a smaller one than he piggy-backed on.

How differently things would have turned out 

Given he'd have been better able to manage the narrative in the wake of the GFC, and (one would hope) would have gone down the fiscal stimulation route rather than use the GFC fallout as a cover for decimating public services under the guise of 'austerity', we could well have been back into economic growth by 2012, with the national feelgood factor of the Olympics still in place.

I'd bet my house we'd have still been in the EU.

Wasn't it true that Corbyn jibbed some rallies he was supposed to speak against Brexit in?

Also for me personally (And someone that was enthused and really wanted Corbyn to do well and get Labour into power) he always came across to me as being massively against the EU. In fact, I watched several recorded conversations and presentations where his dislike of them was thoroughly explored.

I think he wanted us out under a 'Lexit' idea (Which always seemed to me to be a bit far-fetched and unworkable.) His presentations also seemed to portray an EU that seemed very at odds with the facts - for instance - he seemed to think they were very much for deregulation and the Capital state - but it  seems to me that the Tories (for instance) want far, far more deregulation than the EU allowed..?

[Yorkykopite]

He got 2.5m more votes than Milliband did in 2015.

And 4m more than Brown got in 2010.

If you prefer share of the vote, then Corbyn's 40.0% compares to Blair's 40.7% in 2001 and eclipses Blair's 35.2% in 2005

(Brown, btw, got 29%, and Blair got 43.2% in 1997)


Look, I know you will contort yourself in every way imaginable to denigrate Corbyn because you have a pathological hatred of him, but it's folly for Labour to throw the baby out with the bathwater and ignore that Corbyn and the policies his Labour Party preferred, did attract a large constituency of votes. Ultimately - and it was more Corbyn himself as a personality, than the manifesto (at least the initial manifesto, before he started throwing all manner of extra freebies at it during the 2019 campaign) - turned at least as many voters away from Labour as were attracted.

No contortions needed. I was just providing some perspective. Clearly Corbyn did a lot better than expected and May did a lot worse. It still left us with a Tory government and a weak opposition.

I've said many times that there are elements of the 2017 manifesto which are good ones. I've also explained many times why, in my opinion, they were outweighed by the negative ideology of Corbynism. I have no "pathological hatred" for the man, but sure, I despise a good deal of his politics. You may not agree with me, but I've always given my reasons - which, again, have nothing to do with pathology.

[Yorkykopite]

Brown was an absolute disaster!  Not leader material at all!

You then go and compound the issue by having Milliband, followed by Corbyn.  Hardly surprising to see where the party ended up.

Ed Miliband is the real culprit. Apart from being a lousy candidate, he was the one who made the constitutional changes to the Labour party which allowed a politician from Labour's extreme fringes to become viable. I don't think he's ever said sorry, either.

[Nobby Reserve]

Wasn't it true that Corbyn jibbed some rallies he was supposed to speak against Brexit in?

Also for me personally (And someone that was enthused and really wanted Corbyn to do well and get Labour into power) he always came across to me as being massively against the EU. In fact, I watched several recorded conversations and presentations where his dislike of them was thoroughly explored.

I think he wanted us out under a 'Lexit' idea (Which always seemed to me to be a bit far-fetched and unworkable.) His presentations also seemed to portray an EU that seemed very at odds with the facts - for instance - he seemed to think they were very much for deregulation and the Capital state - but it  seems to me that the Tories (for instance) want far, far more deregulation than the EU allowed..?

Exactly my understanding on all aspects.

There had traditionally been leftist arguments against the EU - it was, after all, set up with the aid of the CIA as an exclusive trading bloc.

There have always been aspects of the EU that have been pro-corporate capitalist, and economically right-wing.

In the years leading up to the 2016 Referendum, the ECB had (IMHO) become far too influential. The ECB is packed with ex-Goldman Sachs malevolents, too  . The wake of the GFC, with the imposition of austerity on the most impacted nations (whose debt position had been exacerbated by the economic imbalance between north and south), the EU behaved in a way I found pretty shameful.

But overall, the EU has been a force for progressive good. I remember in the dark days of the 80's and early 90's Thatcherism, when the EU seemed to be the only body willing and able to take on The Thatcher, and I recall the EU forcing a kicking & screaming Tory government to accept things like better workers' rights and environmental protections.

There was a lot of talk at the time of the Referendum and after from 'the left', about EU regulations preventing aspects of the expected Corbyn-Labour manifesto being implemented - like nationalisation of essential utilities, or providing state aid to businesses where there is a strategic or employment benefit to be had. These were largely debunked by experts.

[TepidT2O]

It was a very open question just explaining my thought process, other posters have mentioned peak sure but unless I'm super blind  as far as I can see Andy hasn't actually clarified what he meant and he hadn't when I voted when it first went up.

Andy seldom does

[Zeb]

Ed Miliband is the real culprit. Apart from being a lousy candidate, he was the one who made the constitutional changes to the Labour party which allowed a politician from Labour's extreme fringes to become viable. I don't think he's ever said sorry, either.

It's worse than that, I think. Miliband opened the door to McCluskey to win his leadership attempt. And then realised it was too late to close it again when the vote rigging in Falkirk was discovered and the, no doubt salaciously untrue, rumours began of wider corruption around Unite's leadership and its picked politicians. And here we are nearly a decade on and Uncle Len's fun bus reaching the end of its road to police raids and fear of even mentioning the accounting holes widespread among the candidates to replace Uncle Len and guarantee him, and his close friends, a happy retirement. You don't get Corbyn without Uncle Len's deep pockets and willingness to contest every detail of the rule book at his memberships' expense.

[Yorkykopite]

It's worse than that, I think. Miliband opened the door to McCluskey to win his leadership attempt. And then realised it was too late to close it again when the vote rigging in Falkirk was discovered and the, no doubt salaciously untrue, rumours began of wider corruption around Unite's leadership and its picked politicians. And here we are nearly a decade on and Uncle Len's fun bus reaching the end of its road to police raids and fear of even mentioning the accounting holes widespread among the candidates to replace Uncle Len and guarantee him, and his close friends, a happy retirement. You don't get Corbyn without Uncle Len's deep pockets and willingness to contest every detail of the rule book at his memberships' expense.

Interesting.

It's the lack of self-knowledge that boggles too. I don't expect politicians to be great self-examiners, but you would expect them to have some sense of what is needed to inspire devotion and convince sceptics. Ed Miliband had none of the usual qualities of a leader. He looked awkward in his own skin (I'm one of the few who blame him for cocking up the bacon sandwich eating) and he looked permanently flustered whenever he had to meet a stranger. Unfortunately 99.999% of the electorate fall into that category.  Then there was the ham-fisted attempt to go all 'Blue Labour' and start touting how hard Labour was on immigration.

None of it was any good. I even think the limit of his ambitions might have been beating the elder, more accomplished brother. A bit like watching dim-witted Peter Hitchens trying to sound as intelligent as Chris. Sibling rivalry has a lot to answer for.

[Red Beret]

Anybody hoping Boris gets handsy with some patients who have the Indian variant?

[Sangria]

Anybody hoping Boris gets handsy with some patients who have the Indian variant?

Wouldn't he already have some immunity?

[Zeb]

Interesting.

It's the lack of self-knowledge that boggles too. I don't expect politicians to be great self-examiners, but you would expect them to have some sense of what is needed to inspire devotion and convince sceptics. Ed Miliband had none of the usual qualities of a leader. He looked awkward in his own skin (I'm one of the few who blame him for cocking up the bacon sandwich eating) and he looked permanently flustered whenever he had to meet a stranger. Unfortunately 99.999% of the electorate fall into that category.  Then there was the ham-fisted attempt to go all 'Blue Labour' and start touting how hard Labour was on immigration.

None of it was any good. I even think the limit of his ambitions might have been beating the elder, more accomplished brother. A bit like watching dim-witted Peter Hitchens trying to sound as intelligent as Chris. Sibling rivalry has a lot to answer for.

Funny story about 'Blue Labour' is that it was McCluskey who was among those who pushed it hardest - part of the 'authentic working class' thing and blaming immigrant workers for X and Y and Z. Never actually disowned it so far as I know, just morphed into Lexity gubbins about 'freedom of movement' isn't the same as immigration policy etc. Not casting too many stones about that though as have a certain amount of sympathy with there being no good answers for Labour on that issue for Miliband. Really same faultlines as we've seen before and since.

Only met him the once but Miliband seemed personable enough to me, he'd have probably benefited a bit by taking a tighter line on his public appearances. Kind of like 2017 where Corbyn was either on a stage delivering bromides to the adoring or reciting his prewritten line in answer to any questions put by local media. Make the geeky statesmanly. But it's still perception, not the substance, isn't it?

[Wilmo]

Some cracking posts on the last couple of pages.

Regarding Burnham, I already had my mind made up to vote for him when he ran for leader the first time. He was so poor and unfocused I ended up casting my vote elsewhere. I think he has only grown in stature, both personally and politically since then. I believe he would be a great leader now, he seems to have really found his voice. I echo others in their admiration for Cooper, I still don't understand the attraction to Hilary Benn though.

I voted for Burnham in the poll, though I do like Starmer. Angela Raynor strikes me as someone who could cut across well also.

[filopastry]

Some cracking posts on the last couple of pages.

Regarding Burnham, I already had my mind made up to vote for him when he ran for leader the first time. He was so poor and unfocused I ended up casting my vote elsewhere. I think he has only grown in stature, both personally and politically since then. I believe he would be a great leader now, he seems to have really found his voice. I echo others in their admiration for Cooper, I still don't understand the attraction to Hilary Benn though.

I voted for Burnham in the poll, though I do like Starmer. Angela Raynor strikes me as someone who could cut across well also.

To be honest I haven't really followed Burnham's career so much since his pretty disastrous run at the leadership in 2015, he struck me as being a bit of a weathervane then, wasn't really convinced he stood for anything much.

I presume he has done better as mayor in Manchester, the only thing I will say is that is a much easier job than having to appeal to the broader voting coalition you need to attract to win in the country as a whole.

[Dr. Beaker]

To be honest I haven't really followed Burnham's career so much since his pretty disastrous run at the leadership in 2015, he struck me as being a bit of a weathervane then, wasn't really convinced he stood for anything much.

I presume he has done better as mayor in Manchester, the only thing I will say is that is a much easier job than having to appeal to the broader voting coalition you need to attract to win in the country as a whole.

He strikes me as someone who likes to lead from the back.

[Red Beret]

Wouldn't he already have some immunity?

Think the only thing he is fully immune from is basic human decency.

[Yorkykopite]

He strikes me as someone who likes to lead from the back.

Go on Doc?

[Sangria]

Go on Doc?

Probably referring to the famous Yes PM quote.

[Dr. Beaker]

Go on Doc?

Well, he doesn't seem capable of leading the masses down the path of righteousness by sheer force of argument and persuasion. Rather he wants the masses to reach some kind of collective decision about what direction to go, and then he will gladly 'lead' with all guns blazing. That is to say, he's basically a weathercock.

He doesnt seem to have the same intellectual clout as Cooper, never mind Benn. I voted (above) for Starmer, on the grounds that, for now at least, boring is good. I always felt that folks would eventually get fed up with charisma, but no signs as yet. Still prepared to give that a bit of time though, until chickens have fully come home to roost. God help us if we do need someone with charisma. Labour MPs are too interested in politics to be considered as anything other than weird political wonks by the public. Tories are seen as Flashman characters that most of the working class seem to secretly envy nowadays, rather than abhor like they used to.

[Sangria]

Well, he doesn't seem capable of leading the masses down the path of righteousness by sheer force of argument and persuasion. Rather he wants the masses to reach some kind of collective decision about what direction to go, and then he will gladly 'lead' with all guns blazing. That is to say, he's basically a weathercock.

He doesnt seem to have the same intellectual clout as Cooper, never mind Benn. I voted (above) for Starmer, on the grounds that, for now at least, boring is good. I always felt that folks would eventually get fed up with charisma, but no signs as yet. Still prepared to give that a bit of time though, until chickens have fully come home to roost. God help us if we do need someone with charisma. Labour MPs are too interested in politics to be considered as anything other than weird political wonks by the public. Tories are seen as Flashman characters that most of the working class seem to secretly envy nowadays, rather than abhor like they used to.

Sir Humphrey Appleby : A minister can do what he likes.

James Hacker : It's the people's will. I am their leader. I must follow them.

Yes Minister, The Greasy Pole.

[Yorkykopite]

Well, he doesn't seem capable of leading the masses down the path of righteousness by sheer force of argument and persuasion. Rather he wants the masses to reach some kind of collective decision about what direction to go, and then he will gladly 'lead' with all guns blazing. That is to say, he's basically a weathercock.

He doesnt seem to have the same intellectual clout as Cooper, never mind Benn. I voted (above) for Starmer, on the grounds that, for now at least, boring is good. I always felt that folks would eventually get fed up with charisma, but no signs as yet. Still prepared to give that a bit of time though, until chickens have fully come home to roost. God help us if we do need someone with charisma. Labour MPs are too interested in politics to be considered as anything other than weird political wonks by the public. Tories are seen as Flashman characters that most of the working class seem to secretly envy nowadays, rather than abhor like they used to.

If Burnham is a 'weathercock' then that's no good. I think you definitely have a case there. He was swinging in all directions during the leadership contest. But that was such a bizarre event. It made fools out of everyone, including the voters.

But Burnham does seem to have matured since he went to Manchester. Grown in stature. That's the hope. Plus, he passes the pint test. The proverbial pint with Andy Burnham might now be an enjoyable thing, while the prospect of sitting down in the tap room with Starmer remains an ordeal. In fact to push the trope further Andy would almost certainly get his round in whereas Johnson, while offering jolly company, would be first out of the taxi and last to the bar.

[Dr. Beaker]

If Burnham is a 'weathercock' then that's no good. I think you definitely have a case there. He was swinging in all directions during the leadership contest. But that was such a bizarre event. It made fools out of everyone, including the voters.

But Burnham does seem to have matured since he went to Manchester. Grown in stature. That's the hope. Plus, he passes the pint test. The proverbial pint with Andy Burnham might now be an enjoyable thing, while the prospect of sitting down in the tap room with Starmer remains an ordeal. In fact to push the trope further Andy would almost certainly get his round in whereas Johnson, while offering jolly company, would be first out of the taxi and last to the bar.

I notice you say,'That's the hope'. And that goes for me too, because I'm sure we have all noticed this apparent career resurrection. To me though, he just seems to have got back to where he was previously, and we all know how that ended up.

Regarding the 'pint' test, I know it's all a bit tongue in cheek, but it really is a sorry state of affairs isn't it. I honestly can't think of one MP I would enjoy having a pint with. Stephen Pound was probably the last one but he recently stood down. Going back, imagine having a pint with Harold Wilson or Denis Healey. I'd rather go for a pint with Alec Douglas-Home than this crowd - though I doubt he'd enjoy it.

[Jiminy Cricket]

Agree with this.

I'm a Benn admirer, but he seems to have fallen off the radar. Plus his name - in fact both his names - are liabilities. It's a pity. He has the intellect and a little bit of necessary naughtiness to throw Johnson. He knows the LP inside out. He's a northern MP. He's an attractive character. But, the effing name....the Express, the Mail, the Scum would have a field day.

I meant to respond to this the other day - maybe he could change his name to, 'Benn Hilary', or 'Ben Wedgwood'?

Perhaps there is a more humerous way he could take the sting out of the tabloid's fun and games and their readerships having a field-day with it. Maybe announce that because of the ridiculous and childish antics of the tabloid press, he has decided to change his name to: Hilary Clinton.

[Dr. Beaker]

I meant to respond to this the other day - maybe he could change his name to, 'Benn Hilary', or 'Ben Wedgwood'?

Perhaps there is a more humerous way he could take the sting out of the tabloid's fun and games and their readerships having a field-day with it. Maybe announce that because of the ridiculous and childish antics of the tabloid press, he has decided to change his name to: Hilary Clinton.

As all RAWKites should know, if we start along the mocking peoples name route, I don't think ol' de Pfeffel or whatever his name is, will fare well out of that one.

[Sammy5IsAlive]

Just on the going for a pint thing, both Milliband (post leadership) and Starmer (when the 'mask slips') strike me as interesting personable people. The problem is that their presentation was/is micromanaged to the nth degree by the various non elected officials cosplaying the Thick of It. So you never see the real person come through.

IMHO Starmer (and whoever comes next at whatever point) needs to have the confidence to back themselves and take control of/responsibility for their own presentation. My suspicion is that the same may also go in terms of some of the decision-making that comes out of the leaders office which sometimes feels a little like Starmer is being swept along with the tide by his officials.

He's obviously very professionally qualified/experienced but I do feel like at the moment his lack of political experience/confidence is being a little bit exposed.

[Jiminy Cricket]

As all RAWKites should know, if we start along the mocking peoples name route, I don't think ol' de Pfeffel or whatever his name is, will fare well out of that one.

Yeah. But clowns are supposed to have silly names. It's baked in.

I know we are not being totally serious about Hilary Benn's name, but there is some truth to the matter. There is an element of the Great British public who are easily led on such things. Recall the attacks on Neil Kinnock for having ginger hair. The UK electorate is disproportionately moronic if they let such shit influence their vote. I do not believe this float in most other countries.

[Yorkykopite]

Yeah. But clowns are supposed to have silly names. It's baked in.

I know we are not being totally serious about Hilary Benn's name, but there is some truth to the matter. There is an element of the Great British public who are easily led on such things. Recall the attacks on Neil Kinnock for having ginger hair. The UK electorate is disproportionately moronic if they let such shit influence their vote. I do not believe this float in most other countries.

I once heard Robin Cook say he could never stand for leadership of the Labour party because he was too "ugly." It seemed like an appalling confession at the time. But maybe he was right.

[Dr. Beaker]

I once heard Robin Cook say he could never stand for leadership of the Labour party because he was too "ugly." It seemed like an appalling confession at the time. But maybe he was right.

He would have been great too.

[Jiminy Cricket]

I once heard Robin Cook say he could never stand for leadership of the Labour party because he was too "ugly." It seemed like an appalling confession at the time. But maybe he was right.

I don't recall that. But we know that looks are a factor in every election. It seems, though, some electorates are more prone to this than others. And it is not limited to looks. You can be less than average looking, but if you are clownish or joker, you might get a boost. And, worryingly, the bigger the clown, the greater effect.

[Jiminy Cricket]

He would have been great too.

Yep.

I always liked Kinnock too.

[Yorkykopite]

He would have been great too.

He would. A genuinely witty man. Intelligent too. Devoted to radical social and economic change and some sense of how to achieve it.

Soon Scottish Labour will be but a distant memory but thinking of Cook reminds me how rich that tradition was and how we all benefited from it at some time in our lives.

[Dr. Beaker]

He would. A genuinely witty man. Intelligent too. Devoted to radical social and economic change and some sense of how to achieve it.

Soon Scottish Labour will be but a distant memory but thinking of Cook reminds me how rich that tradition was and how we all benefited from it at some time in our lives.

Thats pretty much half the reason I'll probably end up there when I retire. They mostly seem to be on the right side of stuff, and I don't want to spend my dying days pissing against the wind.

[Yorkykopite]

You can be less than average looking, but if you are clownish or joker, you might get a boost. And, worryingly, the bigger the clown, the greater effect.

I find this phenomenon interesting, if bloody irritating, when related to Johnson.

There have always been characters, 'cards' as they used to call them, in British politics - pretty evenly spread throughout the main parties. Think of Shinwell for us, Bob Boothby for them. Labour always seemed to have more, though that may have been an illusion due to the fact they had regional accents (all Tories sounded the same).

The thing about bloody Johnson though is that he is a "character" rather than a genuine character. You can see the seams, the sticking plaster, the fabrication. A bit of Churchill, a bit of Just William, a bit of Billy Bunter and a lot of Hugh Grant. Stitch all these together and you have the very epitome of a counterfeit.

I can see it, you can see it, many can see it. But, astonishingly, there are millions who either can't see it or can see it and just don't care.

[Dr. Beaker]

I always remember Cook questioning some minister or other, he started, "Last week the minister informed the House that by next Wednesday he would furnish us with a complete answer. I think I carry the whole House with me when I say, today is Wednesday......". Anyway, it amused me at the time.

[Yorkykopite]

I always remember Cook questioning some minister or other, he started, "Last week the minister informed the House that by next Wednesday he would furnish us with a complete answer. I think I carry the whole House with me when I say, today is Wednesday......". Anyway, it amused me at the time.

The fella was DRY.

[Jiminy Cricket]

I always remember Cook questioning some minister or other, he started, "Last week the minister informed the House that by next Wednesday he would furnish us with a complete answer. I think I carry the whole House with me when I say, today is Wednesday......". Anyway, it amused me at the time.

You are not the only one to find that funny. I can see that going down especially well in HOC.

[Nobby Reserve]

I always liked Kinnock too.

I did until the Miners Strike.

[Dr. Beaker]

You are not the only one to find that funny. I can see that going down especially well in HOC.

It did.

[rob1966]

A pint of John Smiths with John Smith