Labour Leadership and Deputy voting intentions

[holyzombiejesus]

Are any of the debates going to be televised?

[NoSleep]

They're on youtube.

[Buelligan]

You've just post-justified all of the attacks on Corbyn's leadership.

Ah, nope.  I said I wouldn't vote for them.  That's what democracy is about, yeah?

[Blinder Data]

There's a decent chance that Thornberry and Phillips won't make it onto the final ballot, isn't there?

Each contender must win the support either of 33 constituency Labour parties (CLPs); or of three affiliates, two of which must be unions, and which between them account for at least 5% of the affiliated membership.

Unions and affiliates will go to Starmer, RLB and Nandy. Thornberry and Phillips will each have to persuade 33 CLPs to nominate them, which could be a real struggle. I could see Rosena Allin-Khan failing on that front too.

[Armin Meiwes]

Are any of the debates going to be televised?

Saturday's one was so I assume they all might be?

[New folder]

To me, it's as obvious as a thing can be, I'm not voting Labour because it's called Labour, I vote Labour because what they propose is what I believe in.  If they stop making those proposals, I will stop voting for them no matter how much I hate the tories or how nicely they present themselves.

Stopping another tory win is all about stopping another Iraq War, stopping PFI, stopping tuition fees, building council houses instead of selling them off.  If we wanted a centrist party, we could've voted LibDem, we could've voted TINGE.

Weird that this even needed to be said, to be honest. The CaB Overton window has shifted so far towards the centre these days.

[New folder]

also, for what it's worth, richard burgon is a sexy beast

[thugler]

I can see how he might be thought of as a liability. He's the anti-Starmer. He seems a bit slow, he looks really 'unpolished' (whatever that is) and his voice is annoying.  You know how Rayner received widespread praise for her performance in the GE debates? I can't imagine that ever happening with Burgon, even if ideologically he's bob on. Also, there's some "anti-semitism" thing that was caught on film and he subsequently lied about saying. I'm sure Rayner will win but I'd like him to have a respectable share of the vote. I believe he's a really decent man and some of the people I canvassed with at the GE couldn't speak highly enough of him, although I do get that he comes across quite poorly.

This. There's more to it than just choosing whoever is most ideologically 'bob on'. He's seen pretty much as a comical figure even amongst many on the left. This is important too. I have nothing personally against him and agree with him on most issues, i just don't think he's good enough for a high profile role like that.

It may be a bizarre question, here it is again just to refresh your memorybut that was what I asked and what you chose to answer.

To me, it's as obvious as a thing can be, I'm not voting Labour because it's called Labour, I vote Labour because what they propose is what I believe in.  If they stop making those proposals, I will stop voting for them no matter how much I hate the tories or how nicely they present themselves.

The important word there is prefer. It's not a tacit endorsement of Clarke. It's a fucking everyday thing to have a preference even when your preferred thing isn't an option. I'd have preferred a Corbyn government implementing the policies in the manifesto, but it has become clear that him as leader is no longer a realistic option any longer (though i believe most of the policies are).

You've done nothing to explain why RLB is the only one who is sufficiently left wing except vague guilt by association stuff.

I don't see the point of only exercising your vote when the very specific thing want is rarely on offer, looking at the options and making a considered decision is just a normal mature thing to do. Pretending that there's no difference between a hard right tory government and even a right wing labour one (not that any of the leader candidates except phillips represent this), seems massively short sighted and the difference to be made to peoples lives is tangible.

A few years ago before Corbyn, Starmer would probably have been seen as one of the more left wing options on offer. Obviously we don't know exactly what any of them would do as leader but it's worth perhaps giving whoever it is a chance.

[Buelligan]

The problem is, you are failing to understand that a Labour Party led by Kenneth Clarke is simply not the Labour Party. 

[colacentral]

This is a little table to demonstrate why RLB is the obvious first preference:

https://twitter.com/edwardpoole1975/status/1219250929196769280?s=19

[greencalx]

We must remember that we may not get to vote on all candidates. At this stage I'm somewhat focussed on the CLP nomination. My CLP  seems to comprise a mix of vocal centrists and quiet lefties (the opposite of the media caricature!) so it's not clear what the numbers are like overall. (It didn't declare in 2015 or 2016, so no clues there). The deputy nomination will be skewed by the sitting MP being one of the candidates - it would be a surprise if the local party didn't support their own man, given that he was overwhelmingly reselected shortly before the GE campaign. In that ballot I intend to vote in a way that makes it is as difficult as possible for a rightist to get through.

[thugler]

This is a little table to demonstrate why RLB is the obvious first preference:

https://twitter.com/edwardpoole1975/status/1219250929196769280?s=19

What guff. A cherry picked bunch of arse.

[thugler]

The problem is, you are failing to understand that a Labour Party led by Kenneth Clarke is simply not the Labour Party.

I never said it was, or advocated such a thing. I was simply pointing out that it's easy to point out the best option of the ones you gave.

[Buelligan]

Sometimes I (and, I think, others) ask things to prompt further thoughts but well done on thinking only about that thing and giving your opinion.

What guff. A cherry picked bunch of arse.

Hardly guff, if it's true then it's worth serious consideration.  If you have other stuff to bring up for consideration, bring it on up.

[solidified gruel merchant]

It may be a bizarre question, here it is again just to refresh your memorybut that was what I asked and what you chose to answer.

To me, it's as obvious as a thing can be, I'm not voting Labour because it's called Labour, I vote Labour because what they propose is what I believe in.  If they stop making those proposals, I will stop voting for them no matter how much I hate the tories or how nicely they present themselves.

Absolutely. I don't understand why people see political parties like football teams that they should support through thick and thin. If the policies are no longer there then I would sooner withhold my vote and send a message than join with this 'power at all costs' trip that casts people like Jess Phillips as our would-be leader.

[Armin Meiwes]

Think the main reason is that the particular political system we have pushes people to vote for "least worst" option or you just end up with the fucking Tory party for another five years, like be honest what would you prefer right now a Starmer led labour govt or Boris Johnson? That's not going to change until we change the system.

[Trichomania]

Jess Philips very unlikely to make the ballot now that USDAW has endorsed Starmer.

[NoSleep]

Think the main reason is that the particular political system we have pushes people to vote for "least worst" option or you just end up with the fucking Tory party for another five years

That was me all my life until Corbyn.

[Kelvin]

I'm with Buellers. I won't be voting for Starmer, Philips or Nandy come hell or high water. No matter how far they come down my ballot, I won't be casting a vote that brings them closer to power. Fuck Philips and Nandy for what they did to Corbyn and said about the membership. Fuck Starmer for being a boring twat with a head like a Weetabix. If one of those three get in, I don't want to be accountable for it.     

After RLB, Thornberry might get my second vote if she gets to the final stage, if only because I have no other left wing options, and she's the only one of the centrists that I trust with the membership. She's also, by some distance, the best "performer" of the remaining five, the only one that has ever impressed me on TV/in interviews, etc.

[Armin Meiwes]

That was me all my life until Corbyn.

Of course, same for most people on here I would assume. But I still can't get my head round the idea of not voting tactically for the least worst option if a best option isn't available.

[Armin Meiwes]

I'm voting Thornberry because I think she will:

a) unite the party (as much as anyone ever can anyway), this is so vital, labour can't afford another 5 years of shooting itself in the foot.

b) is much harder to write off as some kind of nutcase. Sadly most people buy in to this shit (lost count of the number of times I had people saying that to me about Corbyn and those around him,), she is viewed as "sensible" and "pragmatic" by most people.

C) will keep labour on a gen left wing course even if it's not 100% of what Corbyn would do I can live with that if it means a chance of winning the actual election.

[Buelligan]

After RLB, Thornberry might get my second vote if she gets to the final stage, if only because I have no other left wing options, and she's the only one of the centrists that I trust with the membership. She's also, by some distance, the best "performer" of the remaining five, the only one that has ever impressed me on TV/in interviews, etc.

If Thornberry hadn't done the white van man thing (and my problem with it is not so much that it can be used against her, more that it kind confirms that she is a bit arrogant and also that she's a bit foolish) and if she wasn't so plummy and, probably unwittingly coming across as a bit patronising and privileged (which I know is unfair but it's an issue in a potential leader of the Labour Party), I might get myself to like her as second choice.  But there are too many ifs there.

[holyzombiejesus]

Did you see the photo she posted on instagram of her Boxing Day 'supper' of 'leftovers'? Fuck me!

Here's a link but you may have to follow her (fuck knows why I am!) to see it.

https://www.instagram.com/p/B6k3If1ArBI/?igshid=9idsykzjoqk9&fbclid=IwAR39MXStE_Ih8j9_vFs28rUsEXRocZHI5rqTdnwIgrQCo1larWw8EV5BSLw

[Armin Meiwes]

Oh also meant to say d) that I think she's easily the most engaging of the 5. The other 4 are so easy to write off as a bit nonentity (might be unfair to them in person but TV can be a harsh spotlight and even quite charming people like Ed M seemed to shrivel up in front of it).

Agreed on the white van thing tho as it was SUCH a moment of terrible judgement that you can't help but question her thought processes but I think everyone deserves to make one very stupid fuck up.

[Zetetic]

Did you see the photo she posted on instagram of her Boxing Day 'supper' of 'leftovers'? Fuck me!

The centrepiece is a bit much, even I can see that.

[Armin Meiwes]

Oh and most important one e) because I've got a fiver on her at 150-1.

[Buelligan]

The centrepiece is a bit much, even I can see that.

For the life of me, I cannot grasp why anyone, let alone anyone considering standing for the leadership of the Labour Party, would not only photograph that but upload it on social media.  Obvious plate.

[Kelvin]

This is a little table to demonstrate why RLB is the obvious first preference:

https://twitter.com/edwardpoole1975/status/1219250929196769280?s=19

Nandy nominated by Stephen "Cunt Supreme" Kinnock, for those with even a shadow of a doubt where her loyalties lie. 

[Kelvin]

If Thornberry hadn't done the white van man thing (and my problem with it is not so much that it can be used against her, more that it kind confirms that she is a bit arrogant and also that she's a bit foolish) and if she wasn't so plummy and, probably unwittingly coming across as a bit patronising and privileged (which I know is unfair but it's an issue in a potential leader of the Labour Party), I might get myself to like her as second choice.  But there are too many ifs there.

Yes, the white van thing is the obvious low-point, for both those reasons you mention. I also agree that she frequently comes across as very condescending and arrogant. She's good at taking control in interviews, though, and has defended the membership - and Corbyn - on many occasions. If RLB doesn't win, I think the Left / the membership would be more protected / respected under her than any other centrist leader. That alone would probably be worth my second vote after RLB.   

[Armin Meiwes]

Nandy nominated by Stephen "Cunt Supreme" Kinnock, for those with even a shadow of a doubt where her loyalties lie.

Don't think that's necessarily computes - a lot of people "lent" their nominations to her as she was looking like being knocked out, much like some did for Corbs.